The Protector of Citizens determined that the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development made an omission in its work by allocating competition funds for programs relevant for education in 2021 that associations implement, without having previously decided on one of the associations’ objection on the funds allocation decision.

In the investigation to control work regularity and legality, initiated upon the citizens’ complaint, the Protector of Citizens determined that the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development did not make a substantiated decision on one of the participants’ objection, but it sent an e-mail to the complainant via the Ministry’s e-mail address without an authorized person’s signature.

The Protector of Citizens believes that in this case the sending of a notification cannot replace the adoption of an administrative act upon the objection of the participants in the Public Competition, that the notification sent by the Ministry in response to the objection does not contain a decision on whether the association's objection is rejected, dismissed or sustained, it does not include rationale or instruction on legal remedy, it cannot be determined who the enacting authority is and it does not contain the signature of an authorized person.

In the recommendation to rectify the omission, the Protector of Citizens has requested that the Ministry without delay, in the form of a decision, including rationale and instruction on the legal remedy, decide on the association’s objection to the List of evaluation and ranking of the programs applied in the Public competition for the allocation of funds for stimulating programs or the lacking share of funds for financing programs of public interest important for education that associations implement in 2021.

The Protector of Citizens further requests the Ministry to consider, depending on whether it rejects, dismisses or sustains the objection, the possibility of passing an appropriate Act that would supplement the Decision on the selection of programs of public interest implemented by associations in 2021.

The line ministry, according to the recommendation of the Protector of Citizens, in its future work should make sure that when deciding on the association's objections, it always makes a substantiated decision in the procedures for selecting programs to be financed from the budget, in accordance with the principles of good governance and administrative procedure.

The Ministry should inform the Protector of Citizens within 30 days about its acting on the recommendation, along with the submission of relevant evidence on the matter.

The Protector of Citizens has requested Lajkovac City Administration to urgently conduct public procurement procedure for selecting the provider of child personal assistant services and to take actions to enable every child from that municipality, who is in need of it, to commence using this service before the start of the forthcoming school year.

Lajkovac Municipality should notify the Protector of Citizens on acting upon the Recommendation and to submit the pertinent evidence within 15 days.

In the investigation to control legality and regularity, initiated upon citizens’ complaint, the Protector of Citizens determined that the Administration of Lajkovac Municipality made omissions in its work because it failed for two years to take all necessary activities to provide personal assistant service to children, which caused harm and violated the child's right to education and additional assistance and support in education and upbringing.

In the response to the Protector of Citizens, the Administration of Lajkovac Municipality stated that due to emergency circumstances caused by COVID-19 virus the public procurement procedure for selecting the service provider has not been initiated during 2020. However, to this day, the Administration has not launched the public procurement procedure even though it allocated funds for the purpose; realized two trainings related to child personal assistant service and initiated several other public procurement procedures.

The Protector of Citizens has emphasized that the existing epidemic must not serve as an excuse for not conducting a public procurement procedure for the selection of a child personal assistant service provider as children’s rights cannot be restricted, especially since in such situations they are the most vulnerable and sensitive category that is more gravely than others affected by untimely actions and harmful consequences.

On Sunday, 1 August 2021, Mr. Zoran Pašalić, the Protector of Citizens, conducted an unannounced visit to Home for Children and Adults with Disabilities in Veternik. On that occasion, with his associates from the NPM and a forensic medicine doctor, Đorđe Alempijević MD, he carried out an in-depth monitoring of the conditions in which the beneficiaries of the home have been staying.

“During the visit to the Institution we checked the premises and examined the conditions of accommodation, the regime of health care and daily activities, we interviewed the employees, as well as beneficiaries of the home about the manner of exercising their rights. Also, we inspected the relevant medical documentation,” said Mr. Zoran Pašalić, the Protector of Citizens, after the visit.

In his words, even though the visit was unannounced, the present staff acted in a professional manner and extended maximum cooperation to the Protector of Citizens’ team in monitoring the work of the institution and the conditions of beneficiaries’ accommodation.

The Home for Children and Adults with Disabilities has operated for nearly fifty years and at present, it accommodates nearly 500 beneficiaries.

The Protector of Citizens has requested the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development to harmonize the provisions of the Law on Fundamentals of Education System and the Law on Textbooks in order to clearly outline the role of the Parents’ Council in the textbook selection process.

In early June 2021, after the parents from Oslobodioci Beograda Elementary School filed complaints alleging that the school refused to approve the use of free of charge textbooks for some school subjects, the Protector of Citizens initiated the investigation to control work legality and regularity of the competent Ministry and the School.

In the response to the Protector of Citizens, the competent Ministry has invoked Article 34 of the Law on Textbooks, which did not specify that the Parents’ Council might influence the textbooks selection. However, in the same document, not once did the Ministry refer to the provision of article 120 of the Law on Fundamentals of Education System, specifying that the Parents’ Council takes part in suggesting the electives and in the textbooks selection process.

In the Opinion issued to the Ministry of Education, the Protector of Citizens has stated that, due to the inconsistencies of the Law on Fundamentals of Education System and the Law on Textbooks, it is necessary to use appropriate amendments to the Laws in order to harmonize the provisions that define the role of the Parents' Council in the selection of textbooks.

According to the Protector of Citizens, it is necessary to harmonize the articles of the two Laws related to the education of children in order to clearly and unambiguously define the role of the Parents’ Council in the textbook selection process, and thus enhance the child's right to education.