WHO STANDS BEHIND THE SECRET PROJECT REMont: Citizens’ Initiatives without legitimacy assumed the role of the state, then undermined Serbia’s European path!
Although the project had a direct impact on the process of selecting members of the REM Council, the public was never told who financed it, how much money was invested, what the concrete objectives were, and by which criteria the candidates and their political suitability were assessed.
While presenting themselves in public as fighters for democracy, transparency and European values, Citizens’ Initiatives, a citizens’ association, through the controversial REMont project played a role that more resembles a parapolitical operation than the work of a non-governmental organisation. And most importantly – without any accountability to the public.
A secret without finances and accountability
Although the REMont project had a direct impact on the process of selecting members of the Council of the Regulatory Authority for Electronic Media (REM), one of the most important regulatory bodies in the state, the public was never presented with basic information: who financed the project, how much funding was invested, what the concrete objectives of the project were, and by which criteria candidates and their political suitability were assessed.
The REMont project reports used inconsistent, incoherent and arbitrary criteria, which were applied rigorously to some candidates, and almost not at all to others. Such an approach seriously called into question the objectivity and credibility of the entire process, and compromised the role of CI in it.
Unclear mandate
Particularly worrying is the fact that Citizens’ Initiatives took it upon themselves to assume the role of an umbrella organisation representing legally authorised nominators of candidates, negotiating with delegations of the National Assembly, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) and the EU Delegation in Belgrade, and acting as a de facto political actor.
The key question remains unanswered: who, and through which procedure, authorised Citizens’ Initiatives to represent other organisations?
Kurir sent questions to Citizens’ Initiatives, but by the closing of this edition we had received no replies.
Thus, we remained without answers to questions: which exact organisations they represented, on the basis of which formal or informal process CI were selected to represent them, who defined the positions and goals that CI advocated during negotiations, how much real autonomy the organisations themselves, as authorised negotiators, had in the process of nominating candidates, and whether they participated in the negotiations at all or whether CI spoke on their behalf.
Furthermore, Citizens’ Initiatives provided no answers regarding the precise objectives of the REMont project, the time period of its duration, the concrete results achieved so far, the sources from which the REMont project is financed, and the total project budget...
To these questions, Citizens’ Initiatives have never given a clear answer, neither to Kurir nor to the entire public of Serbia.
Without clear answers: The role of the EU in the selection process
Kurir also attempted to shed light on the role of the European Union in this process, and therefore sent questions to the EU Delegation in Serbia, as well as to the European Commission (EC).
When asked whether the European Commission had authorised the EU Delegation in Serbia to grant legitimacy to Citizens’ Initiatives to act as an umbrella organisation representing legally authorised nominators of candidates for members of the REM Council, the EC replied:
‘The EU Delegation consults with a broad range of stakeholders on all matters relating to its work, including Citizens’ Initiatives.’
From the EU Delegation in Serbia, to this moment, no answers have arrived to the following questions of ours:
Did the Delegation participate in any way in the REMont project and, if so, please specify the nature of that participation, including the role of the Delegation, the scope of engagement and the capacity in which the Delegation was involved (financial, advisory, organisational or otherwise);
Who, and on the basis of which criteria, made the decision that the organisation Citizens’ Initiatives would be designated as the umbrella organisation representing legally authorised nominators of candidates for members of the REM Council;
Please clarify whether the EU Delegation in Serbia participated in that selection or supported it in any way, particularly in the context of the role of Citizens’ Initiatives in negotiations with delegations of the National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia, the OSCE and the EU Delegation in Serbia.
Objective: Taking over REM
The actions of Citizens’ Initiatives in this case go far beyond the role of a civil society organisation. CI openly engaged in political agitation, actively participated in political struggles and attempted to influence the distribution of power in a regulatory body that has a direct impact on the media scene in Serbia, and which by definition and legal provisions should be independent in its work.
And that is the essential problem. Non-governmental organisations do not have electoral democratic legitimacy to participate in a political struggle for control of institutions. Their role may be corrective-supervisory and advisory, not operational-political, which most of them, and especially Citizens’ Initiatives, regularly overstep.
Everything indicates that the ultimate goal of the REMont project was to place the REM Council under the control of opposition structures, thereby gaining power over the editing and regulation of the media space in Serbia. When that plan did not succeed, CI challenged the right of national minority councils to independently nominate their candidates, while already elected pro-opposition candidates resigned in order to jeopardise the work of the new REM Council. In this way, they attempted to call the entire process into question and dispute its legality and legitimacy. In other words, the moment the outcome of the process was not to the liking of CI, the process was declared illegitimate!
Instead of the European path...
Although Citizens’ Initiatives publicly claimed that they were participating in the process in order to fulfil the conditions for opening Cluster 3 and accelerate Serbia’s European path, their actions had the opposite effect. By undermining the process of selecting members of the REM Council, Serbia was once again brought into a situation of institutional blockade, thereby further slowing its European path.
The REMont project is yet another example of how, under the slogan of civil society and European values, non-transparent, politically motivated actions are carried out, without any control, without legitimacy and accountability. The public has the right to know who stands behind the REMont project and in whose interest it acted.
Particular suspicion surrounding the entire project is further deepened by the fact that Citizens’ Initiatives persistently refuse to disclose who financed REMont, how much money was invested in that project and under what conditions. And where there are no answers, new questions and new suspicions arise.
According to claims by malicious tongues and anonymous sources close to the media scene and the company United Media, there is suspicion that the REMont project was financed with money from Dragan Šolak, one of the most influential media tycoons in the region.
As these sources claim, the ultimate goal of such engagement was, through control of the REM Council, to create conditions for television stations under Šolak’s control to obtain a national frequency, thereby further strengthening his influence on the media market in Serbia.
Kurir Politics