Source: "Politika"
Recently, for the first time here, the database on the financing of nongovernmental organization from the state budget has been made publicly available. It is available online, on the official internet presentation of the Center for the Development of the Non-Profit Sector. The database includes all of the individual recipients of funding from the «notorious» 481 budget line – grants to NGOs, the amounts paid out, and the state institutions that paid out the aforementioned amounts.
Of course, it would have been more logical if this database showed up somewhere else, such as on the web site of the Ministry of Finance. Moreover, it would have been much better had it contained data on the total amount of public funds used for “grants to NGOs”, including the funds from the budgets of local self-governments, which this database does not include unfortunately. However, regardless of the previously mentioned shortcomings, the database is an achievement in the fulfillment of the undisputed right of the citizens and taxpayers of Serbia to know how the funds they provide are being used.
The Center for the Development of the Non-Profit Sector and Transparency Serbia presented the database “NGOs Financed from the Budget of Serbia 2008-2010”, the result of three years of research, in a manner worth our attention. Analyzing the database and the research is interesting, not only because of the “large” financial amounts, but because, behind the “company” 481 – grants to NGOs, a lot of interesting questions are hidden, questions to which we often do not have adequate answers.
How much does our general public know about how much funding the state allocated to financing the NGO activities? From what we do know, what are the facts, and what are fluid stereotypes such as “little”, “a lot” , “(in)sufficient”, “the majority of funds come from abroad”…?
Despite the fact what “little” or “a lot” means to people, it cannot be denied that the funds are considerable. In 2008, around 71.5, in 2009 around 44, and in 2010 around 47.5 million Euros. When we add up the amounts granted from the local self-government budgets, the totals double.
Who are the recipients and the users of these funds? Are religious, youth, and sport organizations or political parties NGOs? Maybe in some context (they are not “of the government”) they are, but is this also acceptable in the context of financing? Especially, taken into consideration that separate laws define sources of financing for such institutions. Can the entities established and financed by the state, such as the police force, schools, achieves, etc. “be” NGOs? Can legal persons, LLCs and p.l.c.s, as well as individuals “be” NGOs? Of course they are not NGOs, but they all show up as the users of the 481 budget line.
Besides the array of recipients of the funds, what is interesting is the “originality” in the choice of aims, especially (not solely) at the local level. The Center for the Development of the Non-Profit Sector and Transparency Serbia, based on the requests they submitted in accordance with the Law on the Free Access to Information of Public Importance, received documents which confirm that the “grants to NGOs” were used to reconstruct graveyard tombs, flower arrangements, landfill construction, computers for the police force, salaries of the members of the executive boards, taxes, and even, believe it or not, for “uncompromised intellectuals” and some sort of an “Italian consortium”.
Of course, corruption is not hidden behind each and every odd “explanation”; it is more often the case of “technical” bureaucratic reasons (e.g., the National Bank is mentioned as the recipient of all the grants to NGOs in diaspora, only because the pay outs went through the National Bank’s accounts). But, the “precision” and the “overview” of answers should remind us of the notorious truth – the lack of control of public fund use is always a possible source of corruption.
And, since we are already mentioning corruption, in this regard, among numerous “intricacies” found in the new database, a very interesting piece of data was found. We could have seen and heard that from the aforementioned (large) amount that remained in the 481 budget line after the “uncompromised intellectuals”, “Italian consortiums” and similar recipients were paid out, no NGO that deals with anticorruption projects received a single dime from the 481 budget line in 2010.
Even if it did, it would have been unnecessary to invest the funds in a project that would aim to increase the control of “grants to NGOs”. Since, the initiative for the diversification of the 481 line was brought up in January 2008. It is not logical, but this initiative was not brought up by the authorities, but by the civil sector. The initiative was supported by 181 NGOs from the entire Serbia. It is May 2011 and we still do not have an answer to the aforementioned initiative. Is there any doubt that the answer is long overdue? And what should the answer be?
