Parliament can not dismiss Anti-Corruption members


The Assembly can not dismiss the members of the State Commission for the Prevention of Corruption because there is no legal basis for such a thing. This is claimed by the former anti-corruption officials following the initiative of the SDSM parliamentary group, and after the revelation of the scandal with the payment of travel expenses for coming to sessions, some of whom did not even come to work. The case is in the hands of the Public Prosecutor’s Office, which has created a case after an appetite for spending budgetary funds by the members of the Commission and, as they announced, actions are undertaken to establish the facts, data are collected from the Public Revenue Office, as well as from other relevant institutions.

Former officials closely follow developments in the current composition of the Commission. They say that in their time there were not so many abuses of state money as is the case now.

“First of all, we were not employed in the Commission, but we worked there part-time, and we had professional engagement elsewhere. We came to the Commission only at sessions. But there was no payment for travel expenses if someone, for example, came from Bitola. This is what is happening is embarrassing for an institution that has to fight against corruption and money abuse of citizens,” our interlocutors point out.

They emphasize that it is not clear how the Parliament thinks to dismiss members of the Commission when it is not under their authority.

“They go by the logic that the members of the Anti-Corruption are appointed by the Assembly, so they probably think they can dismiss them. However, the Law on Prevention of Corruption is clear: the members of the Commission can be changed on three grounds: if they resign themselves, if there is an effective court verdict against them and if they are incapable of work, it means in case of death or illness. Perhaps they are preparing amendments to the law,” explained a former member of the SCPC.

The head of Anti-Corruption, Igor Tanturovski, did not answer his mobile phone yesterday. A few days ago, he said he did not plan to resign on the grounds that he and his associates were working honestly and others conspired against them.

The SDSM Vice President Frosina Remenski assessed that the audit of the SCPC’s work points to contempt and abuse of the legal provisions, unlawful and unethical spending of the citizens’ money, precisely by the Commission, which should take care to prevent abuse of the rights and obligations of the institutions and all elected officials in the state. She said that members of the Anti-Corruption Group no longer have professional and ethical credibility to perform this function no more than a day.
“For those reasons, if the members of the Anti-Corruption Commission do not immediately submit an urgent and irrevocable resignation, in the Assembly of the Republic of Macedonia, as a body competent for the election of the members of this body, we will initiate a procedure for their dismissal. There will be no tolerance for corruptive and wasteful behavior of any institution and no official in Macedonia,” Remenski said.
The Parliament has not yet received the report of the Public Revenue Office, after which a session of the Commission for Elections and Appointments is expected.

The audit made by the Public Revenue Office (PRO) on the regularity of salaries and other fees in the State Commission for Prevention of Corruption (SCPC) for 2016 found that the members of the Anti-Corruption Commission were paid travel expenses because they came to sessions, and payment was carried out on the basis of unreliable travel orders.
Some of the members did not come to work at all, but came only when there were commission sessions. They submitted three travel orders for the same day, ie that a member of the commission was on the same day abroad and at a commission meeting, the report said.

Goran Adamovski