Skip Navigation

Montenegro

  • Member Since 2011
  • Action Plan 2

ON THE PAGE

Current Action Plan

2018-2021

Action Plan 2

  • Number of Commitments: 6
  • Policy Area Focus: Not specified

Montenegro’s second action plan included commitments closely related to their public administration reform and the country’s EU integration process. Activities included expanding online public participation tools, improving access to government information and open data, improving budget transparency, and conducting a study on whistleblower protection. Other activities involved introducing an online national identification document, online fee collection, and online tax filing.

The adoption of the second action plan in 2018 was an important step toward reviving Montenegro’s OGP process, ending six years of inactivity in OGP. However, in August 2020, parliamentary elections resulted in the near total turnover in public administration leadership and staff. The Ministry of Public Administration was restructured into the Ministry of Public Administration, Digital Society and Media (MPADSM), and the new point of contact (PoC) recommended new government representatives for Montenegro’s OGP multi-stakeholder forum, the Operations Team (OT). These changes slowed implementation. By the end of the implementation period (August 2021), five commitments had limited completion and one was not started. Although the action plan included potentially impactful activities around online public participation (Commitment 2), access to information (Commitment 3), and budget transparency (Commitment 6), their limited completion prevented them from achieving noticeable results or changes in open government practice.

Contact

Point of Contact

Lidija Ljumović Director, Directorate for Innovation, Openness of Public Administration and Cooperation with NGOs, Ministry of Public Administration lidija.ljumovic@mju.gov.me

Commitments

Resources

  1. Montenegro Transitional Results Report 2018-2021

    2022, IRM Report, Web page

  2. Montenegro Transitional Results Report 2018-2021 – For Public Comment

    2022, Report Comments, Web page

  3. Montenegro – Contrary to Process Letter (February 2022)

    2022, Letter, Web page

  4. Montenegro End-of-Term Self-Assessment 2018-2021

    2022, Self Assessment, Web page

  5. Montenegro Design Report 2018-2020

    2020, IRM Report, Web page

  6. Montenegro Design Report 2018-2020 – For Public Comment

    2020, Report Comments, Web page

  7. Montenegro – End of inactivity status – December 2018

    2019, Letter, Web page

  8. Montenegro Action Plan 2018-2020

    2018, Action Plan, Web page

  9. Montenegro – Notification of Inactivity Status (July 2017)

    2017, Letter, Web page

  10. June 2017 OGP Steering Committee resolution on Montenegro’s participation in OGP, designated as inactive

    2017, Letter, Web page

  11. Montenegro – Steering Committee Resolution for Inactivity Status (July 2017)

    2017, Letter, Web page

  12. Montenegro – Letter Requesting Action Plan Extension (June 2017)

    2017, Letter, Web page

  13. OGP Letter to Montenegro Regarding Late Action Plan: November 2016

    2017, Letter, Web page

  14. OGP Letter to Montenegro Regarding Shift to ‘Odd Year’ Action Plan Schedule: January 2017

    2017, Letter, Web page

  15. OGP Letter to Montenegro Regarding Late Action Plan: November 2015

    2017, Letter, Web page

  16. OGP Letter to Montenegro Regarding Late Action Plan: August 2016

    2017, Letter, Web page

  17. OGP Letter – Montenegro – February 2017

    2017, Letter, Web page

  18. OGP Letter – Montenegro – January 2017

    2017, Letter, Web page

  19. Montenegro – Vujica Lazovic – November 2016

    2016, Letter, Web page

  20. OGP Letter – Montenegro – August 2016

    2016, Letter, Web page

  21. Montenegro Letter (Jan 7 2016)

    2016, Letter, Web page

  22. OGP Letter – Montenegro – Nov. 15

    2015, Letter, Web page

  23. Montenegro IRM Progress Report 2012-2013

    2015, IRM Report, Web page

  24. Case Study (2013): “Citizens Voice” Pioneering E-Democracy in Montenegro

    2013, Research Product, Web page

  25. Montenegro – Letter of Intent to Join OGP

    2011, Letter, Web page

Current Data

The following data is updated periodically, most often after large numbers of new action plans and IRM reports.

Commitment Performance

The following variables answer the question “Did this commitment open government?“, and focus on how government practices have changed as a result of the commitment’s implementation.

Key

No IRM data

Pending IRM Review

Download
Major
Outstanding
Starred Commitments
Action Plan 1
0
Action Plan 2

Global

Most per action plan
4
7

Regional

Most per action plan
4
7

How to Get More Starred Commitments

Starred commitments in OGP are one of the ways the IRM designates promising reforms. The graph below shows where the major areas for improvement in action plan design and implementation should take place based on past action plans.

Key

Stars (Global average 7%)

Focus on implementation

Focus on design

Pending IRM review

No IRM data

Focus on design

Focus on objectives and impact (ambition/potential impact)

Focus on relevance to open government

Focus on verifiability

Download
Action Plan 2

Public Participation

This table shows: 1) the level of public influence during the development and implementation of OGP action plans, 2) whether consultations were open to any member of the public or only to those invited; and 3) whether a forum existed that met regularly.

Key

Participation was closed

Participation was open to any interested party

No IRM data

Forum

Pending IRM review

Definitions

Collaborate: Iterative dialogue and public helped set agenda

 

Involve: Government gave feedback on public inputs

 

Consult: Public gave input

 

Inform: Government provided public with information on plan

Download
Collaborate
Involve
Consult
Inform
No Consultation

Development

Action Plan 1
Action Plan 2
Collaborate
Involve
Consult
Inform
No Consultation

Implementation

Action Plan 1
Action Plan 2

OGP Global Report Data

The data below is drawn from the 2019 OGP Global Report. You can view and learn more about the report here.

Selected Dimensions of Open Government

This section captures how each OGP member can play a leadership role, based on IRM-based findings and third-party scores. This list does not cover all of open government and OGP members are not required to take any action.

Action implications

These are recommendations on the role that each OGP member might play in each policy area. The recommendations are derived from a combination of the IRM-based findings and third-party scores.

IRM-based findings

Reflect the performance of commitments in a particular policy area, as assessed by the IRM.

 

(NC) No Commitments
(CA) Commitment(s) in the policy area.
(IR) IRM-Reviewed: At least one IRM-assessed commitment.
(C) Was Complete: At least one commitment was substantially or fully completed.
(A) Was Ambitious: At least one commitment with moderate or transformative potential impact.
(ER) Showed Early Results: At least one commitment opened government in a “Major” or “Outstanding” way.

Third-party scores

Reflect “real-world” performance, i.e., performance outside of the OGP framework. Scores are comprised of various indicators collected by respected organizations.

Download

Anti-Corruption

Beneficial Ownership
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
0 Sources
Open Contracting
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.00 Sources

Civic Space

Freedom of Assembly
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.00 Sources
Freedom of Association
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.17 Sources
Defending Journalists and Activists
Action Implications
Implement for Results
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.75 Sources

Open Policy Making

Participation in Lawmaking
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.33 Sources
Regulatory Governance
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.40 Sources

Access to Information

Right to Information
Action Implications
Implement for Results
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.37 Sources
Open Data (Water / Sanitation)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
1.60 Sources
Open Data (Health)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
1.80 Sources
Open Data (Education)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
1.20 Sources

Fiscal Openness

Transparency
Action Implications
Implement for Results
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
No data
Participation
Action Implications
No data
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
No data
Oversight
Action Implications
Implement for Results
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
No data

Recent Posts

Ministarka Suzana Pribilovic
Montenegro

Faces of Open Government: Minister Suzana Pribilović

Meet Suzana Pribilović, the Minister of Public Administration in Montenegro and an open government champion.

Show More
Open Government Partnership