Plenković Announced ‘Institutional Reorganization’. It Is a Heavy Task

Just over three weeks ago, on August 5, at the celebration of Victory and Homeland Thanksgiving Day in Knin, Prime Minister Andrej Plenković made a completely unexpected statement in his speech. He stated, among other things, that one of the next tasks is ‘to organize the institutions’. From this, it can be concluded that the Prime Minister and the president of the HDZ acknowledged that state institutions are disorganized. And those who have claimed this for years are right.

The government has returned from its summer vacation, and the prime minister no longer mentions the task of organizing institutions. So it could be concluded that the statement in Knin was opportunistic. Or he simply let it slip.

Did he let it slip?

If we start from the assumption that the acknowledgment of disorganized institutions and the need for their reorganization was not a moment of inattention, it would be interesting to consider whether the government led by Andrej Plenković could implement this. Of course, for a grounded analysis, it would be necessary to know what the head of the Banski dvori means by disorganized institutions. Perhaps he means part of the institutions where the leading positions are not yet held by HDZ members or individuals closely associated with the ruling party. Then someone somewhere uncoordinated jumps out without having consulted where consultations are conducted. Such disorganization needs to be eliminated. But let’s be positive! Let’s assume that in his third term, the unquestionable electoral winner of the Croatian political scene genuinely wants to raise the quality of institutional work. From the government itself through ministries and state agencies, the judiciary, health care, state companies, through city and municipal administrations to the last utility company and all five hundred and something local development agencies.

—

—

It should certainly be said that there is a certain percentage of institutions that, despite years of assaults, have maintained a high degree of organization and efficiency. But they are, very likely, in the minority. Unfortunately, there are many devastated and disorganized institutions (everyday examples that cannot be swept under the rug point to this).

Whether he let it slip or not, the prime minister was right when he mentioned the need for institutional reorganization. Unfortunately, the chances that the head of the executive branch would dare to embark on cleaning the ‘stables of Augias’ are very slim. It would be a surprise if the task does not get lost in daily operational reality. And it would be an even greater surprise if any serious positive results are achieved in such an action. The reason? Plenković would have to dismantle a system that has been built over thirty years. In which key roles at all levels are held by members of the party whose president he is. A typical example of ‘Catch-22’.

Rules of the Largest Brotherhood

I know of a case where a media worker was approached by an acquaintance with a proposal to become a member of one of the more well-known brotherhoods. It was not about Freemasons, but it was a level below.

Everything seemed attractive – from the team with which he would regularly socialize to charitable actions. But then it turned out that one of the obligations was to help a brother if requested within the brotherhood. The media worker quickly ran possible situations through his head and thanked them for the honor. Helping when you can is perfectly fine, but making it an obligation because you are in a brotherhood does not guarantee the necessary level of independence in the work you do.

Why this episode? The brotherhoods in question are small. A few hundred members, more or less. So potential conflicts of interest are likely, and the minimal level of independence of the institutions where ‘brothers’ are in positions of power is seriously endangered.

And the HDZ is a ‘brotherhood’ of 217,000 members. The network of ‘helping a brother in need’ has been built over the years and is extremely strong. Who owes whom what, how not to help in employing someone from a ‘brother’s’ family, how not to adjust some tender to someone from ‘brotherhood’? Even those HDZ members who would not want to play according to raw brotherly relations must make enormous efforts to slalom between ethics and law on one side and constant pressures from members of the party brotherhood on the other. Those who blatantly ignore the fact that they are members of the brotherhood easily lose their positions.

A system built over thirty years cannot be changed in a few years. Behavioral theory states that organizations strive to maintain their internal structure and rules. Simplified, at some point, they begin to live an independent life. Today, there is a fear that artificial intelligence will get out of control. Brotherhoods, like long-standing ruling parties, have long passed that tipping point. The prime minister and president of the HDZ has proven many times over the past seven years to be a player who does not enter matches he cannot win. Therefore, the announcement of institutional reorganization may indeed need to be forgotten.