The Centre for Civic Education (CCE) once again warns of the non-transparent process of selecting new full, associate and foreign members of the Montenegrin Academy of Sciences and Arts (CANU), which is expected to be completed at the CANU Assembly session on 23 December. Additional concern is raised by serious indications that certain actions in this process may enter the realm of abuse of authority and negligent conduct.
For years, CANU has remained outside the adequate focus of the public, although it is an institution financed from the state budget. At the same time, it has failed to fulfil its role as a strong intellectual corrective of social trends and a driver of overall social development.
The closed nature of the process is also confirmed by the fact that the opportunity was not used to allow a larger number of candidates to reach the final round of voting for CANU membership. Additionally, the fact that certain departments narrowed the selection to fewer candidates than envisaged by the public call is concerning.Thus, for example, in the Department of Arts, where the public call envisaged the election of two associate members, out of three registered candidates, part of the academics, according to criteria known only to them, decided to move only one candidate forward to the final round instead of the minimum of two and precisely the one with the weakest references, particularly when it comes to objectively measurable international achievements.
In this field, the candidates for associate membership were prof. Branislav Mićunović, director, prof. Rifat Alihodžić, PhD, architect, and MSc Jelena Tomašević, academic painter. With six votes, Mićunović advanced to the further procedure.
By not nominating Mr Jelena Tomašević, an opportunity was missed to improve gender balance, as men make up 93% of full members and 87.5% of associate members of CANU. However, CCE also points out that by reviewing the professional and artistic references for all three potential candidates, obtained through requests for free access to information, it was established that the selected candidate for membership was in fact the weakest in terms of references.
One of the key references for artists is the country, city and institution where the presentation of an artistic work has taken place.
In this regard, the selected candidate Prof. Branislav Mićunović had guest appearances or worked on 9 projects (performances) in Belgrade, 6 in Novi Sad, 6 in Niš, 1 in Kragujevac, 2 in Šabac, 2 in Leskovac, 2 in Pirot, 1 in Zaječar, 3 in Vršac, 1 in Rijeka, 1 in Banja Luka, 1 in Tuzla, 1 in Užice, 15 in Podgorica, 1 in Cetinje, 2 in Bar and 1 in Skopje, which amounts to a total of 55 guest appearances, and not a single one in an EU country or on another continent. This means four countries, including Montenegro and the former Yugoslav states where he appeared at the time when we were a joint state. At the same time, the 55 guest appearances refer to 48 performances, as some were staged in several cities.
The rejected candidate, prof. Rifat Alihodžić, PhD had 7 buildings and realised projects and 5 exhibitions in Podgorica; he designed 8 major residential buildings, 3 cultural and public buildings, 3 administrative buildings, 4 healthcare facilities, 3 industrial buildings, and 6 interiors, and is the recipient of two awards in competitions in Bijelo Polje. Furthermore, he designed 5 buildings or won awards in competitions in Pljevlja, 2 buildings in Rožaje, 3 buildings in Berane, 3 buildings in Plav, 3 buildings in Bar, 3 buildings in Mojkovac, 1 building in Tirana, 1 building and one participation in a competition and exhibition in Priština, one participation in a competition and exhibition in Tivat, 7 exhibitions, participations in competitions and architecture salons in Belgrade, one participation in the Architecture Biennale where he was commissioner of the Montenegrin pavilion in Venice, with a nomination for an award in Barcelona, participation in two competitions in Mexico, one of which received an international third prize, exhibited work in Bucharest, and two awarded works in Ljubljana and Piran. Thus, this is at least 75 works exhibited and/or produced in eight countries.
The rejected candidate, Associate prof. Jelena Tomašević, MSc had 2 exhibitions at the Venice Biennale, 16 exhibitions in New York, 9 exhibitions in London, 4 exhibitions in Berlin, 4 exhibitions in Frankfurt, 11 exhibitions in Milan, 4 exhibitions in Düsseldorf, 2 exhibitions in Arlington, 2 exhibitions in North Carolina, 1 exhibition in Sacramento, 2 exhibitions in Miami, 1 exhibition in Trullo Rubini, 2 exhibitions in Polignano a Mare, 2 exhibitions in San Marino, 1 exhibition in Iceland, 2 exhibitions in Madrid, 1 exhibition in Barcelona, 1 exhibition in Bilbao, 2 exhibitions in Brussels, 2 exhibitions in Bucharest, 2 exhibitions in Bologna, 2 exhibitions in Turin, 1 exhibition in Geneva, 1 exhibition in Kassel, 1 exhibition in Cologne, 1 exhibition in Dresden, 1 exhibition in Athens, 1 exhibition in Mexico, 2 exhibitions in Rome, 4 exhibitions in Istanbul, 3 exhibitions in Vienna, 1 exhibition in Liechtenstein, 3 exhibitions in Russia, 1 exhibition in Warsaw, 1 exhibition in Sofia, 2 exhibitions in Ljubljana, 1 exhibition in Dubrovnik, 1 exhibition in Pula, 2 exhibitions in Rijeka, 8 exhibitions in Podgorica, 14 exhibitions in Cetinje, 7 exhibitions in Sarajevo, 1 exhibition in Zagreb, 3 exhibitions in Tirana, 1 exhibition in Novi Sad, 10 exhibitions in Belgrade, 2 exhibitions in Budva, 2 exhibitions in Herceg Novi, 1 exhibition in Čačak, 1 exhibition in Prizren, and 1 exhibition in Vršac i.e., about 150 exhibitions in 25 countries, presenting nearly the same number of works.
It remains unclear on the basis of which exact criteria prof. Mićunović was selected as the sole candidate for associate membership, bearing in mind the objective references of the other two potential candidates. This overview does not even include reviews in relevant international art journals and international awards, all of which further favour candidate Mićunović.
CCE reminds that Article 11 of the CANU Statute prescribes the criteria for evaluating results, emphasising that these include an outstanding contribution to science, that is, special significance for science, which implies original research results and works based on them, highly evaluated domestically and internationally, which significantly advance knowledge in the relevant scientific field, as well as an outstanding contribution to art, that is, special significance for art, which implies top-level creativity containing new, original forms of expression and imagination. This article further states that contribution to the social development of Montenegro “implies scientific and artistic creativity that contributes to the overall progress of the state of Montenegro”.
This example indicates an obvious absence of the application of a scoring system based on professional references, thereby opening space for subjectivity and the influence of interest groups, which is why CCE expresses concern that in the case of the selection of a candidate for associate membership in the Department of Arts, Article 11 of the CANU Statute has been violated.
CCE calls on CANU to publicly explain such a proposal and calls on the public to closely monitor the further process of selecting new members of CANU.
Sara Čabarkapa, Active Citizenship Programme Coordinator