Source: Danas

Personal attitude

Rodoljub Šabić

It is certain that the name of the journalist of "Kikindske novine" Zeljko Bodrozic would remain permanently on the list of noticeable, valuable results achieved in the fight for freedom of expression in our country. He was once the first journalist and even the first citizen of our country who succeeded in an effort to have the UN Human Rights Committee rule on purported violation of his right to freedom of expression by a verdict of a court in our country in a libel and insult lawsuit filed against him by a politician. It seems that that success before the competent body of the United Nations would remain unique, because since Serbia has become a member of the Council of Europe, the citizens of our country have gained access to a closer and probably more convenient mechanism for human right protection - the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

Source: Blic

Guest commentator

Rodoljub Šabić

Commissioner for Information

A copy of a decision passed by a Belgrade magistrate at the end of the last year which found N. S., director of a large State enterprise, guilty of violation of the Law on Free Access to Information and sentenced a fine which may be replaced by imprisonment of 30 days in case of non-payment, was recently sent to the address of the Commissioner for Information. We do not have to mention his full name; in any case, although he was very much in the public eye, he is no longer a director. The copy of the decision was not sent officially. In any case, the proceedings against the said director were not instituted ex officio, but on a proposal of citizen M. V. as plaintiff. He sent the copy of the decision to the Commissioner. It reminded me that the first decision which found someone guilty at all and punished a person for violation of freedom of information several years ago in Sombor was not passed in proceedings instituted on request of a competent public authority, but in proceedings petitioned for by citizens.

Source: Politika

People who discovered irregularities in their companies lost their jobs, they were even imprisoned. That is why it is hard to understand that the Governments Bill contains no provisions on protection of insiders, especially when "protected witness" is often a hardened criminal.

Source: "Blic"

The Commissioner has recently ordered that the Shareholders and Creditors Association of RK Beograd be delivered a document containing the list of workers of this company who have, pursuant to a special Government conclusion fulfilled conditions to receive a special gratuity, provided that personal data, such as: address, personal ID number, current account number and the like, be left out from this list.   Instead of abiding by the order, the Ministry of Economy and Regional Development has sent an ‘'interesting'' answer: ‘'We cannot act upon your order without prior consent of the Republic Legislation Secretariat, due to possible infringement of the provisions of the Law on Personal Data Protection, even though you have stipulated that personal data was omitted, as well as without consent of the Republic Public Attorney, due to a possibility that individuals who would consider their rights violated file a suit.''

Source: „Pravda''

The Commissioner for Information of Public Importance, Rodoljub Sabic, explains in his interview for Pravda the essence of the initiative to legally protect ‘'insiders'' in Serbia, whether the domestic public is well informed on the issue and analyses the work of the Commission with him at its head.  

What is, in short, the essence of your initiative to the Republic Ombudsman to protect the ‘'insiders'' by law?

Source: ‘'Blic''

Global Barometer of Corruption has recently been published, which is the result of the research of Gallup International on corruption in 69 countries of the world. It, as well as the more authoritative, Transparency International's Global Corruption Perceptions Index, unfortunately, indicates stagnation in fight against corruption.

As ‘'lately'' a lot has been done on adopting various documents, laws or international conventions, which are to serve as a normative basis for anticorruption actions, this repeated impulse should be understood as a warning that the focus of the fight against corruption should be in the real, not in the normative world. The fact that even our citizens' perception of international environment indicates stagnation in the fight against corruption requires taking real, especially preventive, anticorruption measures.