In Agency report - nothing about control

The report of the Anti-Corruption Agency about spending for the presidential elections showed that this campaign was unique because of the drastic increase in the number and value of donations which the candidate's campaign helped the citizens of Serbia. The report, however, does not specify whether the Agency has carried out additional checks of these donations as well as whether and in what cases the suspicion that the data presented false or incomplete undertaken measures within their jurisdiction and called for action by other competent authorities.

Unlike the presented report on the costs of the presidential campaign, the previous documents of the Agency on the financing of campaigns and parties have been published as a report on the control of these costs and contain the analysis and conclusions about the findings of the inspection and details of the measures taken.

“This report is rightly not called report on the costs of control of election campaign for President of the Republic, but only expense report”, said for Insajder Program Director of Transparency Serbia Nemanja Nenadic.

He said that the latest Agency report on the campaign for presidential elections only provides indications of possible irregularities and to initiate proceedings before the competent authorities, but not the list of offences for which they will be run procedures.

“It describes what are all checks carried out in other state bodies, political parties, banks and service providers in the campaign, to which the Agency has the right, or whether the data is completely obtained”, says Nenadic.

The Agency is not obliged, but only authorized to check the irregularities

He adds that the problem is that the law does not prescribe what the Agency should do in the context of control, nor deadlines that should act.

“For all these reasons, it remains to hope that this is not a final report on the election campaign for president of Serbia and will subsequently be published complete control report” said for Insajder Program Director of Transparency.

However, department for public relations of the Anti-Corruption Agency said today to Insajder's journalists that there will not be additional reports on campaign financing for presidential elections in 2017.

The Agency did not get the answers to question why this time the report does not have detail the findings of the cost control of the candidate as well as information about possible irregularities.

We are also not answered whether the Agency from other institutions requested additional checks over 7500 grants which citizens are largely help the campaign the two candidates – Aleksandar Vucic and Vuk Jeremic.

The controversial origin of money

Recall, in the report Anti-Corruption Agency noted that this year, based on the donations of individuals, collected 54 times more than in 2012. The number of citizens who are financially help candidates for president has been increased by as much as 75 times, and so campaign 2012 donated a total of 102 persons, while in 2017 there were over 7500 donors.

Most of the money from the donations of citizens collected Aleksandar Vucic about 270 million and Vuk Jeremic about 220 million dinars. All other candidates through donations collected significantly less money, a total of 7.4 million.

It is interesting that Jeremic with total of 418 donors gathered almost the same money as Vucic, whose campaign was supported by about 7 thousand people.

As in the campaign for the elections in 2014, most donors SPP paid for identical amounts – per 40.000 dinars.

This information is not specifically highlighted in the recently published report of the Agency, although due to identical donation Anti-Corruption Agency in 2014 requested additional verification of the Ministry of Labor and the Directorate for Prevention of Money Laundering.

Based on these data later asked the Higher Public Prosecutor's Office in Belgrade to initiate against SPP criminal proceedings on suspicion of money laundering during the election of 2014.

In that campaign almost all donations to SPP was amounted to 40.000 dinars and it was found that individuals who donated the party at the same time benefit from social assistance.

Nemanja Nenadic from organisation Transparency Serbia says that it is not disputed the fact that campaigns are financed with significant assets or individuals, but that might be controversial origin of the money.

He reminded that the law prohibits contributions to political entities paid through third parties, or that someone give else money to pay in his name donation party or campaign.

Therefore, if there was a suspicion for an individual that he did not pay his own money, that would be the reason for initiating an investigation and then a criminal proceeding.

In this regard, the Agency could carry out a part of the work within its competence, and before the matter is taken over by the public prosecutor. This report does not show whether some checks were carried out on the authenticity of these sources of income, or whether it was checked if the physical or legal person had personal funds for such and such a donation, "Nenadić said.

He points out that in this regard, the Agency has established a practice, and in 2012 and 2014, after the election, the data of the recipients of social assistance with the list of donors of allowances were crossed, as requested by the Directorate for the Prevention of Money Laundering at some suspicious payments.

“Maybe some of this has already been done, but we do not know that because it is not mentioned in the report. The Anti-Corruption Agency will publish the annual work report at the beginning of next year and this document should contain all data on the activities of the Sector for Control financing of political activities, including review of identified irregularities as well as on procedures initiated by them”, concludes Nenadic.