REPORT ON PUBLIC PROCUREMENT IN MONTENEGRO FOR 2011

-Report Summary-

As it was noted earlier in this Report, it was prepared and submitted to You in accordance with the public procurement system in Montenegro which is regulated by the Public Procurement Law (Official Gazette of Montenegro 46/06) and a set of secondary legislative acts, standard forms and templates, and it has been operationalized through the institutions in charge of implementation of the rules – Ministry of Finance, the Public Procurement Directorate and the Commission for Control of Public Procurement Procedures.

The system is based upon legally and operationally sustainable foundations, which are in accordance with the regulations, standards and practice of the European Union. 

Implementation of the Public Procurement Law in the reporting period complied with the rules and requirements of the European Union in terms of ensuring full freedom of movement of goods, people and capital.

As it was pointed out repeatedly throughout this Report, the above mentioned Public Procurement Law, in essence, is in conformity with the EC Directive for the classical sector and the fundamental Directives in the rights protection field. 

The obligation referred to in Article 41, paragraph 2 of the Interim Agreement, concerning harmonization of the public procurement legislation with the EU system, in the utilities sector and the latest Directive in the rights protection area, shall be fully observed by harmonization with all EU rules and standards, by incorporating them into the national legislation through adoption of a new Public Procurement Law wherein the utilities legislation would be incorporated, and other improvements shall be ensured in accordance with the EU requirements, especially in the rights protection area, the system of professional development and training, clarification of certain procurement procedures, eliminating some ambiguities upon defining concepts and procedures, better legal and technical conception as well as other improvements in accordance with the recommendations by the European Union and other international institutions and organizations monitoring the public procurement systems.   

Drafting and adoption of new Public Procurement Law which will be followed by a timely preparation of secondary and implementing acts, shall ensure the highest possible compliance with the Directive 2004/17/EC for the utilities sector (water management, energy, oil and gas, mining, telecommunication and transport), novelties required by the Directive 2007/66/EC in the rights protection area, and full harmonization with the Directive 2004/18/EC, time-limits for duration of the invitation to public competition as well as other improvements that are necessary for the efficient functioning within the area.

Within the activities on realization of the program of the Government of Montenegro and monitoring of implementation of the public procurement rules, the Directorate actively cooperates in implementing the National Program for Integration of Montenegro into the European Union for the period 2008 – 2012, the Enhanced Permanent Dialogue and reporting to the National Commission for implementation of the Action Plan for realization of the Program for Fight Against Corruption and Organized Crime as well as its promotion within the specific activities and tasks.  

The most important opinions on application of the Public Procurement Law and secondary legislation are published at the Internet page of the Directorate.
Within its direct administrative authorities in exercising state administration tasks, the Directorate provides prior approval to the contracting authorities for the selection of certain public procurement procedures, in cases provided by the Public Procurement Law.  

On a daily basis, through submitting requests to be received by the authorized officers, a large number of covered parties - contracting authorities addressed the Directorate in order to obtain its opinion on application of public procurement rules in accordance with the authorization to provide advisory and consulting services.

The List of parties covered by the Public Procurement Law has been published at the Internet page of the Directorate.  

A List of bidders in public procurement procedures has been prepared on the basis of data on awarded public procurement contracts, and it will be published at the Internet page of the Directorate.  

Regularly, in order to improve information exchange, exchange of experiences and overcoming possible problems, the Directorate maintains and realizes cooperation with representatives of the state authorities, organizations and institutions, as well as with business sector, and especially with the Chamber of Economy. An appropriate cooperation and coordination with the Ministry of Finance has been provided on all aspects of cooperation and related activities. The cooperation with the civil sector has also been established.   
The Public Procurement Directorate, since its establishment in 2007, has actively participated and cooperated in organizing training for the staff responsible for performing public procurement tasks. The training sessions have been conducted continuously in 2008, 2009 and continued trhroughout 2010 and 2011. 

At the beginning of each calendar year, including 2011, the Plan of Training Needs in Public Procurement Field is prepared as well as the Training Program in Public Procurement Field for 2011 and 2012, on basis of which the specific training in this area is conducted. Prior to that, the trainers who passed the training courses are conducting training sessions.

The Public Procurement Administration, on the basis of signed memorandum on cooperation with the Commission for Prevntion of Conflict of Interest and the Anti-Corruption Initiative, was actively, during the whole year, participating at the seminars on anti-corruption policies and prevention of conflict of interest, and these seminars were intended for public officials, judges and prosecutors, government officials, representatives of civil sector and the media. A total of eight seminars were organized, attended by 30 to 50 attendees, where the representatives of the Public Procurement Administration spoke about the solutions offered by the Public Procurement Law concerning the anti-corruption and prevention of conflict of interest policies. 

A seminar on current topics in the field of budget accounting – IAS (International Audit Standards) for the public sector, roles of internal control and audit of budget users, the development of internal audit in the public sector of Montenegro, the reporting for the purposes of a more efficient audit in the public sector, application of the new Public Procurement Law and records and assessment of the state property – was held in Podgorica, and the speakers of the seminar were representatives of the Ministry of Finance, the Public Procurement Administration, the Consortuim partners SRRS and the State Audit Institution. The seminar was attended by about 50 participants.  

Organized by SIGMA and the Public Procurement Administration, two workshops were held with the respective topics “Framework Agreement and Centralized Procurement“ in the European Union and Croatia and “Implementation of the Utilities Directive – Legal and Practical Aspects“. On basis of the SIGMA study on centralized procurement and examples from the practice of the Centralized Procurement Authority of Croatia, the aim of the workshop was the exchange of experiences and a free discussion on various aspects of framework agreement and practical operation of centralized procurement bodies, as well as the issues regarding implementation of the new Public Procurement Law. The aim was to  gain understanding on how to begin awarding the framework agreements and how to successfully develop and organize centralized procurement bodies. Apart from the representatives of the Public Procurement Administration of Montenegro, the active participation at the seminar was taken also by the representatives of the state authorities, joint stock companies, audit institutions, the Chamber of Economy and others, and the speakers were from Romania and Croatia. The seminars were attended by about 50 participants.
By completed modernization of the system for electronic publication of contract notices and by the legislation reform itself, one of the global aims is being accomplished, and that is the implementation of the EU internal market requirements in the public procurement field and fostering efficiency and transparency in the use of public funds. In that regard, the training session on use of the new procurement portal were organized. The sessions were intended for smaller groups of 15 – 20 participants during the period September – December 2011.   

The American Chamber of Economy in Montenegro held a Roundtable on public procurement: “The Amended Law and Procedure“, in which the representatives of the State Commission and the Public Procurement Administration participated. The American Chamber of Economy organized this Roundtable in order to introduce its members to the changes in the current tender procedure brought by the new Public Procurement Law and to obtain more information on how the new Law will affect the future buyers from among its membership. The seminar was attended by about 50 – 60 business operators. The Ministry of Finance in collaboration with the Public Procurement Administration and the Commission for Control of Public Procurement Procedures organized a public discussion on the Draft Strategy for development of the public procurement system in Montenegro for the period 2011-2015. The organizer of this event was the Public Procurement Administration, together with the Ministry of Finance and the Commission for Control of Public Procurement Procedures. The aim of the public discussion was establishing a constructive dialogue, direct exchange of experiences and opinions among the participants in public procurement procedures, representatives of the NGOs and members of the Working Group that prepared the Draft Strategy.    

Within the Multi-Beneficiary Project IPA 2009 “Training in Public Procurement in the Western Balkans and Turkey”, the Public Procurement Administration has a role of the “central institution“, with a purpose of presenting the project at national and regional levels, including representation in the project activities. In the framework of the above project, a training of the first group of trainers was conducted, and it is necessary to perform a selection of candidates for national trainers until the end of February, so that they would be able to attend the second phase of the Training of Trainers both in English and their national languages. 

The contracting authority – a party covered by the application of the Public Procurement Law shall obtain a prior approval from the Directorate in cases it intends to carry out the procurement procedure using one of the following procedures types: negotiated procedure without prior publication of contract notice, negotiated procedure with prior publication of contract notice, award of contract by framework agreement as well as consulting services. The Directorate shall decide upon contracting authority’s request within eight days from receipt of the request, that is the receipt of complete documentation and proofs, and the approval for commencement of the procurement procedure shall be valid until the end of the budget or financial year. In case that the Directorate fails to deliver the approval within the indicated time period, a contracting authority may commence the public procurement procedure, hence this provision is binding for the Directorate in a sense that it has to make timely decision and requires an increased vigilance on fulfillment of conditions for giving this approval.  During 2011, a total of 176 requests for giving prior approval were submitted, dealing with the fulfillment of conditions for conducting a negotiated procedure without prior publication of contract notice, whereupon the Directorate did not give its approval to 23,29% of the requests, considering that the contracting authorities did not present valid reasons for conducting the indicated procedures which represent an exception to the general rule concerning publication of contract notices, reasons for protection of exclusive rights, exceptional circumstances, other emergency reasons or previously precisely defined conditions for possibility of their realization by a certain bidder, as well as in other precisely defined circumstances.    

It should be certainly noted that the number of submitted requests for the use of negotiated procedure without prior publication of contract notice decreased by 29,31% in 2011 compared to 2010, that is, there were 73 fewer requests submitted. 

During the reporting periods, on a daily basis, by written request, including the requests to be directly received by the authorized officers, a large number of both contracting authorities and the bidders addressed the Directorate in order to obtain its opinion on application of the public procurement rules in accordance with its authorization to provide advisory and consulting services. Although the Directorate designated two days per week for providing these services, having in mind the urgent nature of undertaking certain actions in public procurement procedures, it almost daily directly received contracting authorities in its premises and, by interpreting and instructing them on how to apply certain provisions, provided them with advisory services on acting in specific situations stipulated by the public procurement legislation. The most common services provided were concerning planning in public procurement, covered parties, choice of procedure, criteria and sub-criteria in public procurement procedure, assessment and comparison of bids, undertaking certain actions in a procedure, the course of the procedure, time limits for filing complaints and response upon the filed complaint, eligibility proofs, preparation of tender documents and the amendments to the latter, and so on. The Directorate issued a significant number of opinions within its competence to provide advisory and consulting services. 

The advisory services were provided largely also by telephone – a help desk, and to these requests it was necessary to provide prompt and timely answers, despite the relatively limited number of the Directorate’s staff and their daily tasks, which significantly inhibited performance of other regular activities and implied a need for their realization outside regular working hours and during the non-working days. 
During 2011, the Public Procurement Administration received 72 requests for free access to information, of which 19 were granted the access to the requested information, 23 requests were denied due to lack of the requested information, 1 request was partly allowed the access to information and partly denied due to lack of the other required information. To 29 requests for free access to information it was responded by notification. Of the above mentioned requests, the Network for Affirmation of the Non-Governmental Sector (MANS) submitted 64 requests (to 17 the access was allowed, to 23 the access was denied due to lack of information and to 24 requests it was responded by notification).  
 
The NGO Institute Altenativa submitted two requests in 2011 (to 1 the access was partly allowed, and partly denied due to lack of the other required information). 

Five requests were submitted by CEMI (of which by notification was responded to 4 requests and for 1 the access was allowed).

The National Police submitted to the Public Procurement Administration one request for free access to information, to which it was responded by notification. 

Upon the indicated decisions one complaint was filed by the applicant, and it was rejected as ungrounded.

The Directorate has, in purpose of ensuring transparency of public procurement, within its competences, prepared and published at its Internet page two brochures: “How Corruption Harms a Public Procurement Procedure“ and “Practical Guide on Method of Reporting Irregularities in Public Procurement Procedures“. 

When it comes to the fight against corruption, according to the current legislation, the Directorate is primarily engaged in preventive actions. In order to increase the accessibilty of the Directorate to the citizens, a telephone line was established through which the citizens can address the authorized officer to report corruption, obtaining information and legal advice. The Public Procurement Law contains provisions on anti-corruption in the Article 13 and on conflict of interest in the Article 14. These solutions correspond to those contained in the EC Directives. For both anti-corruption and the conflict of interest, the reports are usually aimed at the possibilty of adjusting the tender documents by the certain public procurement officers or members of the tender commission so that these documents favour the preferred bidder or they may open the received bids before official opening and thus reveal the confidential information to the potential favoured bidder. In such a case, the officer shall bear disciplinary and criminal liability. For such an action, of which the Directorate is notified during the application process, or if the irregularity is observed ex officio, it shall launch an appropriate proceedings, primarily before the State Audit Institution, in case the public procurement principles are violated. Furthermore, the Directorate may react towards the Public Prosecution Office, High Courts or Basic Courts.

The preventive role of the Public Procurement Directorate has been highlighted in the text of the new Draft Public Procurement Law, as well as its repressive role through its competences to impose fines.

Also by telephone, the Directorate received reports on conflict of interest in various administrative areas, and these persons were directed to the institutions responsible for providing advice and acting in these areas.

In the forthcoming period, within the system of providing training and advisory and consulting services, a special attention shall be paid to the specific training on the methods of eliminating conflict of interest and possible anti-corruption actions.
 
During 2011, the Public Procurement Administration received 140 reports on potential irregularities in public procurement procedures, mostly submitted by the civil sector. Acting upon the above mentioned reports, a complete documentation accompanying the contested procedure was required, and after its detailed analysis, a report was drawn up containing the findings and opinion of the Public Procurement Administration regarding the given procedure. Acting upon these reports, it was established that 26 reports were grounded, and that the contracting authority did not conduct the procedure in accordance with the Public Procurement Law. After the irregularities in public procurement procedures were established, the report was sent to the State Audit Institution, Ministry of Finance, the contracting authority to whom the report was referring, as well as to the submitter of the report. A total of 112 reports were ungrounded, i.e. acting upon them it was established the there were no irregularities. Upon 1 report the Administration notified the submitter of the report on its non-competence regarding the subject of the report, while 1 public procurement procedure, that was the subject of report, was cancelled, and the repeated procedure on the identical public procurement subject was conducted in accordance with the Public Procurement Law. 

In 2011, one report on existence of corruption in public procurement procedure was submitted, via telephone, by an anonymous submitter. Upon that report, the complete documentation accompanying the said procedure was required from the submitter of the report, and after its detailed analysis it was established that the report was ungrounded, i.e. that there were no corruptive actions in the said procedure. 
It should be noted that the newly adopted Public Procurement Law contains definition of the inspection control with clearly established provisions that refer primarily to: regularity of conducting public procurement procedures with a value between EUR 3,000 and EUR 500,000; timeliness of submission and publication of public procurement plans, contract notices, decisions in public procurement procedures and public procurement contracts; timeliness and correctness of preparation and submission of public procurement reports; fulfillment of conditions for performing the tasks of a public procurement officer; correctness of preparation and maintaining of public procurement records; keeping of documentation  arisen from the public procurement procedure. 
The inspection control referred to in paragraph 1 item 1 of this Article shall be performed as of the day of publication of the decision on selection of the most favourable bid, the decision on cancellation of a public procurement procedure, until the public procurement contract is concluded.
In case that, during the performance of inspection control, the public procurement inspector establishes that an appeal has been lodged against the decision referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article or that the time limit for lodging an appeal had expired, the inspection control procedure shall be suspended. 
The Strategy for Development of the Public Procurement System for the Period 2011-2015 was also adopted during the reporting period, as well as the new Act on Internal Organization and Classification of Job Positions, while the risks that occur in public pocurement have been elaborated together with the measures for a possible degree of interventions for the purposes of reduction of the corruptive actions. 
Total value of public procurement in Montenegro in 2011 was EUR 377,260,094.38 or about 11,43% of total Gross Domestic Product of Montenegro. In 2009 this share of public procurement in the total GDP of Montenegro was 14,43%, in 2008 this share was 16,11%, while in 2007 it was 18,92%.
Total number of concluded contracts in 2011 was 5022, with a value of EUR 377,260,094.38, while the average value was EUR 75,121.48. Of total value of concluded contracts, 90,82% were contracts of big value, while the share of small-value contracts was 9,18%.

As a consequence, the upper limit for the small-value proceurement has been defined precisely, considering that the proportion between the big-value contracts and those of a small value was stable during 2010 and 2011, which is not the case compared to the period 2007-2009 when the share of the small-value contracts was between 4% and 7%.

According to the subject of procurement, in the structure of the total procurement value in 2011, the goods are dominating with 47.65%, followed by works 32.69% and services 19.66%. 

Public procurement of goods, services and works were realized mainly through an open procedure, to which the highest degree of transparency and competition is inherent compared to other procurement procedures. 

The share of open procedure in total number of concluded public procurement contracts in 2010 was 92.91%, which clearly indicate to full transparency and non-limitation of competition process for obtaining contracts. This percentage of the so-called competitive procedure, which imply a full transparency and non-limitation of competition process for obtaining a contract, deserved the highest ranking (A) according to the World Bank methodology. Namely, the ranking (A) is achieved when the share of the competitive procedure is between 75% and 100%.  

Analyzing the negotiated procedure, particularly the one without prior publication of contract notices, it appears that in 36.36% of the cases the basis for negotiation was protection of technical rights and “a technical, or artistic reason“, due to which the procurement contract could be awarded to a sole bidder. This basis is characterized by the lack of competition, since the negotiation process is conducted with a sole bidder, which puts a contracting authority in the least favourable position. For such cases, the Law foresaw the solution that obliged the contracting authority to publish a decision on selection of the most favourable bidder with whom it intends to conclude a contract at the Internet page of the Public Procurement Directorate. Also, the contracting authority is obliged to, before commencing a procedure, obtain a prior approval from the Directorate, stating the procurement subject and specific reason why only the selected bidder is capable of executing the given contract. Upon that, the bidders are left with the legal time limit of 8 days, as of the day of publication of the decision, to submit an appeal to the contracting authority, in case they consider that they too can execute the given public contract, and not only the selected bidder, and thereby suspend the public procurement procedure, until the final decision is being made.  However, in case that none of the bidders or other interested parties, whose rights or obligations may be affected by the decision, do not submit an appeal, the contracting authority, after expiry of the 8-days- time-limit, in accordance with the Law, may conclude a contract, regardless of the actual justifiability of application of the negotiated procedure and selection of the certain bidder. However, in case that no bidder or any concerned party, whose rights or obligations could be affected by the decision, has submitted an appeal, the contracting authority may conclude a contract after expiry of the time limit of 8 days, in accordance with the Law, regardless the actual justifiability of application of negotiated procedure and selection of a certain bidder. The contracting authorities which conducted the most of the public procurement procedures through negotiated procedure without prior publication of contract notice, upon this ground, are as follows: Directorate for Development of Small and Medium Sized Enterprises, Phytosanitary Administration, Judicial Council, Montecargo AD Podgorica, Railway Infrastructure, Montenegrin Electric Enterprise, General Secretariat of the Government, Clinical Centre of Montenegro, National Police, Montenegrin Olympic Committee, Public Property Administration, Railway Transport, Health Insurance Fund of Montenegro, Ministry of Sustainable Development and Tourism, Ministry for Information Society, Municipality of Kotor, Central Bank of Montenegro, Municipality of Bar.

The second ground, according to its relevance, i.e. its share expressed in percentage of 17.74% are procurements of works, goods or services – in cases when, in the open and restricted procedure, there were no valid or acceptable bids submitted and provided that the original terms for the contract award and content of tender documents were not substantially altered.  The contracting authorities which conducted the most of the public procurement procedures without prior publication of contract notice, upon this ground, are as follows:  Health Insurance Fund of Montenegro, Environmental Protection Agency, Pension and Disability Insurance Fund of Montenegro, Ministry of Culture, Montenegrin Electric Enterprise – Functional Unit Distribution, Montefarm Pharmaceutical Institution, Airports of Montenegro, Directorate for Public Works, Old Royal Capital Cetinje, Institution for Enforcement of Criminal Sanctions, University of Montenegro.  

The next ground according to its relevance, i.e. its share expressed in percentage of 10.21% are additional works and services. According to the official records, public procurement reports, the most frequently used arguments for conducting this type of public procurement procedure are contained in the provision of the Article 23, paragraph 1, item 4, indent 1, concerning procurements of works and services which are not included in the originally considered project or in the original contract, but which have, due to unforeseen circumstances, become necessary for provision or execution of the services described therein, or the works in cases when such additional services or works could not be technically or economically separated from the main contract without causing major difficulties to the contracting authority. Such contracts may only be concluded with the bidder to whom the main contract was awarded, and the total value of the contracts awarded for additional services or works may not exceed 25% of the main contract’s value.  These opportunities were used by a certain number of contracting authorities within the funds allocated from the budgets intended for these purposes that were included in the total estimated value of public procurement defined by the public procurement plan and invitation to public competition, which was published within the original procedure (open procedure) having preceeded these additional activities. The contracting authorities which most frequently conducted public procurement procedures using negotiated procedure without prior publication of contract notice, upon this ground, were as follows: Directorate for Public Works, Montenegrin Electric Enterprise, Ministry of Interior and Public Administration, Agency for Development and Construction of Podgorica, Public Enterprise Regional Water Supply for Montenegrin Coast, Public Enterprise for Coastal Zone Management, Municipality of Plužine, University of Montenegro, Ministry of Education and Sports... Additional works or services had to be documented, or conditioned by unpredictable verifiable circumstances which caused cancellation of execution of the original contract which caused additional surpluses and subsequent works and services, recorded in the reports of the supervising body and building journal, and that were particularly specified according to their character, scope and total value. These proofs were submitted to the Public Procurement Directorate which, after thorough verification, evaluated whether the conditions had been fulfilled for conducting this type of procedure and for the conclusion, after the stipulated procedure had been completed, of an appropriate annex to the contract . 
The next ground, according to its relative significance, is the “urgency“ (represented in 5.91% of the cases), to which the contracting authorities resort in the conditions of “extraordinary circumstances and unforeseen events“. Also, the contracting authority is obliged to, upon launching such a procedure, obtain prior approval from the Directorate, stating the subject of public procurement and the specific reason and justification for the stated urgency, or exraordinary circumstances. Naturally, such procedure is also subject to appeal. The contracting authorities which most frequently conducted public procurement procedures using negotiated procedure without prior publication of contract notice, upon this ground, were as follows: Clinical Centre of Montenegro, Public Property Administration, Airports of Montenegro, Health Insurance Fund, Red Cross of Montenegro, National Police, Primary School Savo Ilić Kotor...
The least represented ground for application of negotiated procedure without prior publication of contract notice, with a percentage of 5.37%, was the one provided by the Article 23, paragraph 1, item 2, indent 2 of the Public Procurement Law. The contracting authorities which most frequently conducted public  procurement procedures using negotiated procedure without prior publication of contract notice, upon this ground, were as follows: Public Enterprise Regional Water Supply for Montenegrin Coast, Examination Centre, Health Insurance Fund, Public Procurement Directorate, University of Montenegro, Public Institution Boarding House for Schoolchildren and Students Podgorica.
The ground defined in the Article 23, paragraph 1, item 2, indents 1 and 4 of the PPL, with a percentage of 0.57%, was used by the following contracting authorities: Municipality of Pljevlja and Ministry of Economy.
It may be noted that one of the most prominent features of public procurement, i.e. the intensity of competition in public procurement procedures, was significantly increased during the previous period, and in 2011 it was 4.34 maintaining the trend of 2010,  thus, compared to 2007, that intensity is significantly higher.

The greatest relative significance, expressed through the value of procurement in 2011, had the state administration bodies, organizations and services (38.02%), followed by public institutions and public enterprises founded by the State (29.01%), public institutions and public enterprises founded by local self-government (15.94%) and the local self-government unit bodies (9.95%). The above data imply that the state administration bodies, organizations and services as well as the public institutions and public enterprises founded by the State are the category of contracting authorities holding the greatest savings potential, in terms of the value.   

The relative significance of the state administration bodies, organizations and services in the value structure of public procurement varied during the observed period slightly over 38%, as well as the significance of the public institutions and public enterprises founded by the State which, during the observed period, was something about 30% of the public procurement value structure.

It is obvious that the public institutions and public enterprises founded by the State have reduced their activities related to procurement of goods, works and services for more than 10% compared to 2010. 

A certain number of contracting authorities did not submit their reports on public procurement nor did they inform the Directorate that they had not have any procurements in 2011, that is, that other contracting authority provided appropriate procurements for their needs, so, in that way, they did not observe their obligation stipulated by the Law (Appendix 1).   

According to the system availability of the statistical data on public procurement in our country, the annual report is confined to the technical-procedural side of public procurement. The report offers an answer to the question “how the funds are spent in public procurement”, or “what is being procured and which procedures are being used”. However, the current degree of development of the public procurement system obviously does not provide the answer to the second, very realistic and useful question on what is being procured, from the aspect of justifiability of money spending, and even from the aspect of the public spending in general.

From the system point of view, public procurement in our country observes these issues only partially and exclusively through a broader concept of good and conscientious planning of public procurement. This fact actually limits the scope for better monitoring and analysis of the issue, but a significant amount of public funds spent through public procurement in turn require finding of a system solution, in which direction, through the current legislative process, we expect to obtain good results. In this regard, within the current process, it has been pointed out to the need of increased involvement of the competent authorities in the monitoring of justifiability of spending funds in public procurement, as well as spending of the public funds in general. 

Basic recommendations for improvement the public procurement system and priorities in the forthcoming period, would regard improvement of effectiveness of spending in public procurement, increased transparency of procedures, fostering of competition, elimination of discriminatory practices, reduction of room for abuse, improvement of efficient and independent review of complaints procedure, provision of appropriate analytical monitoring of public procurement, an efficient system of sanctioning violations of public procurement rules (that would have a strong preventive effect), fulfillment of conditions for increased efforts of the Public Procurement Directorate in the process of monitoring public procurement procedures, in particular through preventive-instructive supervision in order to strengthen discipline, prevention of possible corruptive actions and unethical behaviour, coordination of activities with the economic policy of the Government of Montenegro in terms of strengthening efficiency and transparency of public administration operations through realization of electronic procurement system, establishment and application of rules of conduct that would oblige the contracting authorities and their staff to observe these rules in order to prevent corruptive behaviour and develop high ethical standards, keeping “the list of bidders” that are proven to have been engaged in corruptive activities or did not perform their contractual obligations, with a possibility to use a so-called “black list” composed by relevant international bodies and correct assessment of the public procurement value  through a consistent application of the rules on assessment of the contract value for public procurement of goods, works or services, as well as the conditions of framework agreements.