Bearing in mind that the reform process is often more visible at the local level of government, from the citizens’ point of view, the Coalition decided for the first time to prepare a Local Institutional Barometer. This pioneering undertaking includes analysing the work of six selected institutions from lower levels of government that exercise their competencies in the areas of Chapter 23 (Judiciary and Fundamental Rights) and Chapter 24 (Rights, Freedom, Security)
The Local Institutional Barometer follows a methodology that has already been tried in practice and was developed for the needs of the Institutional Barometer at the national level. To assess the efficiency of the analysed institutions, the methodology and created indicators are divided into three different ‘baskets’ that reflect three dimensions of institutional functioning: internal efficiency, institutional embedment and institutional legitimacy.
The subject of the Local Institutional Barometer was the analysis of the work of the following six institutions that operate at the lower levels of government: the Provincial Protector of Citizens - Ombudsman, the Anti Corruption Mechanisms of the City of Novi Pazar, Shelter for Women and Children at Risk of Domestic Violence “Women’s Safe House” of the Center for Social Work of the City of Novi Sad, the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office in Užice, the Migration Council of the City of Subotica and the Safety Council in Požega.
One of the main conclusions of the Local Institutional Barometer is the limited internal efficiency of some of the analysed institutions. The analysis showed that in the case of the Migration Council of the City of Subotica and the Safety Council in Požega, council bodies have not had a single meeting since November 2020 and 2019, respectively. In the case of Anti-Corruption Mechanisms in Novi Pazar, the analysis showed that there was not even one recorded case of internal whistle-blowing, violation of the Code of Ethics for Public Officials, or breach of the Code of Conduct for Employees.
As for the transparency of the analysed institutions’ work, it is essential to note that additional efforts need to be made to ensure that certain institutions publish relevant data about their work and performance. For example, in the case of the Provincial Ombudsman, since 2017 it has not been possible to find publicly available opinions and recommendations or proposals for the assessment of constitutionality and legality, either on the official website or in publicly available documents. Regarding the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office in Užice, some sections of the official website do not contain any information, while some were last updated in February 2018.
Finally, regarding the institutional embedment of the analysed institutions, it is important to point out that despite the above-mentioned shortcomings and difficulties they face in their daily work, we can conclude that there is a good basis for institutional embedment with other actors at the local government level. As an example, we can highlight the “Women’s Safe House” from Novi Sad, which has been recognised as an important and indispensable local actor in the fight against all forms of violence against women and girls.
