Due to unjustified absences from the plenary parliamentary session in September, 15 parliamentary representatives, 11 fewer than in July, will receive reduced monthly allowances, with the record holder for absences in September being SDP’s Ivan Klarin, the mayor of the municipality of Tisno, as stated in the decision on the reduction of parliamentary allowances due to unjustified absence made by the parliamentary Committee for Elections, Appointments, and Administrative Affairs on Wednesday.
For each ‘marking’, 150 kuna less
Klarin, who resigned from his parliamentary duty and returned his mandate to the SDP, was absent all eight days that the Parliament held plenary sessions in September, so his monthly allowance of 1500 kuna will be ‘shortened’ by 1200 kuna.
With three unjustified absences, independent representative Bruna Esih and HDZ’s Drago Prgomet share second place, with their allowances reduced by 450 kuna each.
>>>Australia Ends Search for Missing Malaysia Airlines Plane
Ana Komparić Devčić (SDP), Željko Lenart (HSS), and Petar Škorić (HDZ) each have two unjustified absences, while Sabina Glasovac (SDP), HDZ’s Ivan Kirin, Tomislav Klarić, Željko Reiner, and Ivan Šipić, ‘Bridge’ members Božo Petrov and Vlaho Orepić, and Ivan Lovrinović (PH) each have one.
>>>First Champion in ‘Marking’ from the Parliament Fined 1,350 Kuna
Thus, there are six HDZ members, three SDP members, two representatives from the Bridge, and one each from the parties Change Croatia, HSS, Independents for Croatia, and independent representative Željko Lacković with unjustified absences.
This spring, the Parliament amended the Law on the Rights and Duties of Representatives at the initiative of the Bridge, allowing for financial penalties for representatives who unjustifiably miss sessions. For each absence, their allowance is reduced by 150 kuna.
>>>SDP Demands Immediate Dismissal of Tomašević; Plenković Regrets His Associates Did Not Recognize the ‘Cry for Help’
The law stipulates that a representative can justify their absence if they were ill, if there was a death in the family, if they had to go to court, or to social, political, cultural, and other gatherings to which they were invited.
Although this is not stated in the law, the Committee for Elections and Appointments decided to justify representatives’ absences due to participation in the work of municipal and city councils and county assemblies.
The Committee took this stance even though the Bridge, which proposed punishing representatives, did not accept the amendment that went in that direction when voting on the law that regulates this. In this way, the Bridge believed this spring, a message would be sent that council duties are more important than parliamentary duties.
