The Government is Now Changing Laws Adopted Under International Pressure

Instead of accountability for the failure to implement existing laws somewhat aligned with international standards, new laws with ‘ironed out’ provisions are being proposed.

writes Ivica Grčar
[email protected] 

Several readers have pointed out that laws are not being enforced at all. It has been noted that laws against fan violence, the Consumer Protection Act, the VAT Act, the Freedom of Information Act, the Act on the Prohibition of Sale of Alcohol and Cigarettes to Minors, etc., are not being enforced. The emphasis is on the fact that the laws are not enforced by the Government and the relevant ministries, not that citizens do not comply with them. In recent days, I have also experienced that the existing Media Act is not being enforced by the competent Ministry of Culture. When asked what to do now since the Media Act is not being enforced, Nina Obuljen, the State Secretary in the Ministry, said that a new media law should be proposed because the existing one cannot be enforced.

Controversial correspondence raises the question of why a new law is needed if the old one has not been enforced. Or, a more pragmatic question, what to do and how to act during the period while the new law is not formally proposed and adopted? I asked State Secretary Obuljen why she thinks the Ministry of Culture should remain formally responsible for a law that this ministry has not enforced for the past six years. ‘Well, don’t say that,’ replied the offended State Secretary Obuljen.

Article 26 of the Media Act stipulates that the publisher is obliged to keep a special record (register) of contracts concluded with each person from whom they ordered a newspaper contribution. According to Article 60 of the same Media Act, it is stipulated that ‘a publisher who does not conclude a contract with the person from whom they order a newspaper contribution commits an offense.’ However, no publisher keeps the ‘special record’ of authorship and other contracts as prescribed by the Media Act. And for the implementation of the Media Act, according to Article 2 of that law, ‘the competent ministry is the Ministry of Culture.’ When asked what the competent ministry has done or will do to finally start enforcing these legal provisions, Ante Mandarić, the director of the Directorate for Normative and Administrative-Legal Affairs in the Ministry of Culture, replied that this should be addressed to the State Inspectorate or the State Attorney’s Office, not the Ministry of Culture.

Removal of Competence I asked Director Mandarić for an addition to his response in terms of citing the legal basis on which he bases his view that the Ministry of Culture is not competent for action in this case, but rather the State Inspectorate and the State Attorney’s Office. In the addition, Director Mandarić reiterated, this time referring to the provisions of the Misdemeanor Act, that instead of the Ministry of Culture, the State Inspectorate and the State Attorney’s Office are competent for action due to the non-enforcement of the Media Act. Mandarić also failed to comment on the provision of Article 2 of the existing Media Act that ‘the Ministry of Culture is the competent ministry.’ But after that, there was a call for a conversation with State Secretary Obuljen in the Ministry of Culture. In that conversation, State Secretary Obuljen and Director Mandarić unsuccessfully tried to ‘pacify’ the demands for the formally competent Ministry of Culture to finally take action due to the non-enforcement of the existing Media Act. The true reason for avoiding the enforcement of the existing Media Act was also revealed in the conversation. Until the beginning of 2004, the existing Media Act was adopted only a year earlier. However, under international pressure, especially from the EU and the OSCE, the current Media Act had to be adopted with a series of provisions accepted due to international demands. And now the Ministry of Culture assesses that the moment has finally come when the provisions imposed by representatives of the EU and the OSCE in 2004 can be quietly abolished.

We invite entrepreneurs to present their problems. Following your writings, by pointing out the absurdities in individual cases, we will highlight the shortcomings of the system as a whole and thus support the readers of Lider as individuals in their unequal disputes with the cumbersome state administration. Contact:
e-mail: [email protected]
tel. 01/6333-524
address: Ivica Grčar, Lider,
Savska 41, 10144 Zagreb