Publishers: University of Belgrade – Faculty of Political Sciences (Centre for Democracy) Sarajevo Open Centre Faculty of Political Science – University of Montenegro For the publishers: Prof. Ilija Vujačić Saša Gavrić Prof. Sonja Tomović Reviewers: Prof. Drago Zajc, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ljubljana Prof. Florian Bieber, University of Graz Layout and printing: [email protected] Circulation: 500 ISBN 978-86-84031-61-9 Comparative Analysis of Democratic Performances of the Parliaments of Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Montenegro Edited by Slaviša Orlović Belgrade, Sarajevo, Podgorica 2012 Members of the research team: Serbia Slaviša Orlović, Project Leader, University of Belgrade – Faculty of Political Sciences [email protected] Jelena Lončar, University of Belgrade – Faculty of Political Sciences [email protected] Dušan Spasojević, University of Belgrade – Faculty of Political Sciences [email protected] Dragana Đ. Radojević, University of Belgrade – Faculty of Political Sciences [email protected] Bosnia and Herzegovina Saša Gavrić, Sarajevo Open Centre [email protected] Goran Marković, Faculty of Law Pale, University of East Sarajevo [email protected] Damir Banović, Sarajevo Open Centre, Faculty of Law, University of Sarajevo [email protected] Maja Sahadžić, Sarajevo Open Centre, International University Sarajevo [email protected] Montenegro Zlatko Vujović, Faculty of Political Science, University of Montenegro [email protected] Nataša Ružić, Faculty of Political Science, University of Montenegro [email protected] Nenad Koprivica, Faculty of Political Science, University of Montenegro [email protected] Boris Vukićević, Faculty of Political Science, University of Montenegro [email protected] Prepared within the framework of the Regional Research Promotion Programme in the Western Balkans (RRPP), which is run by the University of Fribourg upon a mandate of the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, SDC, Federal Department of Foreign Affairs. The views expressed in the paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent opinions of the SDC and the University of Fribourg. CONTENTS Introduction ..........................................................................................................9 CONSTITUTIONAL AND INSTITUTIONAL CONTExT OF ThE PARLIAMENT Slaviša Orlović CONSTITUTIONAL, POLITICAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK OF ThE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF ThE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA .........................................................................17 Goran Marković, Maja Sahadžić LEGAL AND POLITICAL FRAMEWORK OF ThE WORK OF ThE PARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLY OF BOSNIA AND hERZEGOVINA .....................................................................................47 Boris Vukićević, Zlatko Vujović CONSTITUTIONAL AND LEGAL-POLITICAL FRAMEWORK OF ThE PARLIAMENT IN MONTENEGRO, 1989–2012 ...................59 Legislative FUNCTION Dragana Đurašinović Radojević LEGISLATIVE FUNCTION OF ThE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF ThE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA ..........................................................83 Goran Marković LEGISLATIVE FUNCTION OF ThE PARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLY OF BOSNIA AND hERZEGOVINA ..............................103 Boris Vukićević LEGISLATIVE FUNCTION OF ThE PARLIAMENT OF MONTENEGRO .............................................................................121 CONTROL FUNCTION Dušan Spasojević CONTROL FUNCTION OF ThE National Assembly OF ThE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA ........................................................141 Maja Sahadžić CONTROL FUNCTION OF ThE PARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLY OF BOSNIA AND hERZEGOVINA ..............................155 Zlatko Vujović, Stevo Muk CONTROL FUNCTION OF ThE PARLIAMENT OF MONTENEGRO .............................................................................171 Transparency OF ThE PARLIAMENT Jelena Lončar TRANSPARENCY OF ThE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF ThE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA .......................................................................189 Damir Banović Transparency OF WORK OF ThE Parliamentary Assembly OF BOSNIA AND hERZEGOVINA ..............................203 Nataša Ružić TRANSPARENCY OF ThE PARLIAMENT OF MONTENEGRO ....217 INFLUENCE OF International ActorS Jelena Lončar Influence of International Actors on ThE Work OF ThE National Assembly OF ThE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA...233 Saša Gavrić INFLUENCE OF International Actors ON ThE WORK OF ThE Parliamentary Assembly OF BOSNIA AND hERZEGOVINA ...................................................................................249 Nenad Koprivica INFLUENCE OF International Actors ON ThE WORK OF ThE PARLIAMENT OF MONTENEGRO ...................................263 Slaviša Orlović, Jelena Lončar, Damir Banović, Zlatko Vujović CONCLUDING REMARKS ................................................................279 Biographies of the Research Team Members ..................................................305 Comparative data on the states encompassed by the research State/characteristics Serbia Bosnia and Herze- Montenegro govina Independent state 1878 Independence at 1992, internationally 1878 at the Congress since the Congress of Berlin recognized after the of Berlin referendum for inde- 2006 after the referen- pendence 2006 at the referen- dum in Montenegro dum Unitary-federal/con- Unitary Federal Unitary federal state Population 7,120,666 inhabitants 4,377,033 620,029 (census of 2011) (census of 1991) (census of 2011) Organization of Parliamentary-presi- Semi-presidential Parliamentary with the government (parlia- dential system (semi- system President mentary, presidential, presidential) semi-presidential system) Manner of the elec- Direct Direct Direct tion of the Head of the State Unicameral or bica- Unicameral Bicameral Unicameral meral parliament Number of MPs in 250 42 members + 81 the parliament 15 delegates Electoral system Proportional (D’Hondt Proportional (Sainte- Proportional (D’Hondt formula), threshold Laguë), threshold 3%, formula), threshold 5%, natural threshold compensation man- 3%, special threshold for minorities, Serbia dates as correction, 8 for minorities, entire as a single constitu- constituencies country as a single ency constituency Number of parlia- Nine (since 1990) Six (since 1996) Nine (since 1990) mentary convocations since the introduction of multiparty system EU member (phase Candidate status since Stabilization and As- Candidate status since in the association March 1st, 2012 sociation Agreement December 17th, 2010. process) signed in June 2008 Accession negotia- tions opened on June 29th, 2012 NATO/Partnership Membership in the Membership in the Membership in the for Peace member Partnership for Peace Partnership for Peace Partnership for Peace since December 2007 since December 2006 since December 2006; MAP obtained in December 2009 INTRODUCTION The volume in front of you is the result of one-year research project “Com- parative Analysis of Democratic Performances of the Parliaments of Serbia, Bos- nia and herzegovina and Montenegro.” The research team of the project was composed by researchers and associates of the University of Belgrade – Faculty of Political Sciences, Faculty of Political Sciences of the University of Montene- gro and Sarajevo Open Centre, who are the authors of this volume. The project was funded within a broader regional project “Social, Political and Economic Change in the Western Balkans” within the framework of the Regional Research Promotion Programme in the Western Balkans (RRPP) (http://www.rrpp-west- ernbalkans.net/). The RRPP is aimed at improvement and development of re- search in the field of social sciences in Albania, Bosnia and herzegovina, Kos- ovo, Macedonia, Montenegro and Serbia. The programme supports researchers through research grants, methodological trainings and opportunities for regional and international exchange and networking of researchers. The programme is financed by the Swiss Development and Cooperation Agency, and is operated by the University of Fribourg, Switzerland (http://www.rrpp-westernbalkans.net/ en/about.html). Therefore, the goals of our project included the enhancement of institutional relationships between the research organizations in the region, to- gether with establishment of contacts among young researchers and creation of regional academic network that should serve as a basis for future joint projects. The researchers were interested in political development of ex YU countries. Do they develop in an identical, similar or different ways? What are the problems and potential solutions for unconsolidated democracies? What are the similarities and differences? Does the same institution – parliament, yield different results in different social and political contexts? Parliaments do not exist “in a vacuum“. Partners in this project come from new and fragile democracies. In a broader sense, these are three states which have been encountering very different prob- lems in the process of democratic transition and consolidation, and which, above else, obtained their state independence in different ways. A relatively weak par- liament is a common weakness of new democracies. The development of the idea and practice of parliamentarism after the renewed multiparty system has not been accompanied with adequate theoretical debates, empirical research or appropri- ate professional literature. Parliament is an institution enjoying almost the lowest 10 Introduction level of trust of citizens. Citizens rather see it as a “voting machine” and a “screen to democracy” than as “institution