Hunting for the Seized Property

While the politicians roam the bumpy country roads, the experts persist in advocating the turn of the economy toward the highway. The latest initiative of that kind came from 35 economists, in the form of the ambitious Program of Radical Economic Reforms in FR Yugoslavia, a more elaborate follow-up to the ideas launched in February this year by the Group 17, which consists of economists who, instead of cosmetic embellishments, advocate drastic changes in industry and economic policy. In this way, they offer to the Yugoslav public a comprehensive program of swift changes, whose completion - according to the idea of their creators- should be crowned by full membership of FR Yugoslavia in the European Union!

The program itself contains nothing revolutionary; it has been conceived as a selection of good and bad experiences from other countries which have passed down the road of transition. It completely conforms to the principles supported by the assistant professor from the School of Economy in Belgrade Mladjan Dinkic, who is also coordinating the entire project, that today "exclusiveness means not to be exclusive".

This program stands out from the already tested expert standards in its suggestion to introduce a new currency, taxation and the confiscation of the property gained by the abuse of power in the period between 1991 and 1997.

Mr. Dinkic says that the proposal on the new currency is just "the issue of technical nature," directed towards the return of the practice of savings in dinars (which currently, according to calculations of Bosko Zivkovic from the School "Braca Karic", does not exceed 1.5 DEM per capita). According to this idea, Parliament would decide on the appearance and the name of the new currency. But the question of why the savings in a new currency would be more attractive than in existing dinars supported by clear and stabile economic policy of a political team that hasn't been compromised yet (if such can still be found) remains without good enough scientific explanation.

And yet, as the worst outcome of the introduction of new currency can bring about neutral effects, this idea surely does not cause controversy which, on the other hand, arises from the proposal about taxation and confiscation of the property gained through the abuse of power. Even the experts who worked on the program were not unanimous about it. Nebojsa Medojevic from the Montenegrin privatization agency and the main supporter of this idea believes that the new authorities in FR Yugoslavia can provide assistance from the specialized foreign agencies and relevant experts and legal entities (for instance, he quotes the Bureau for the Control of Foreign Resources with the USA's Ministry of Finance), until the investigation of whether the money is gained by legal or illegal means is completed. The illegally-gained money would be confiscated. Aware of the impossibility to establish with certainty who, by whose authorization, in which country and bank has put away the money the possible owner stole, the Program's creators advocate single taxation in such cases. The first and the most obvious controversy in this concept is that on the one hand, the restitution of seized property is recommended, and on the other, its confiscation or taxation. If we wish to keep to the principle of legality, how is it possible to establish whether someone came into possession of his property legally or illegally? Furthermore, it is a public secret that the thefts have been occurring over the last 50 years; why then to restrict the sanction only for to the illegally-obtained possessions over the last six years? And what about those who moved abroad with the stolen money? Finally, there is the issue which may be the most important in respect of the management of industrial flows: what if this story leads to the excessive taking out of the scarce capital that is circulating in this country?

With all these stories, the citizens of this country are finally interested in what and how big are the chances that something nice can really happen? Like in February, the experts' concept of the reforms is not backed up by any party, although meanwhile 18 new experts joined the group of 17 economists (who are not members of any party), and among them are some well-known party activists (Bojan Dimitrijevic from SPO; Miroljub Labus and Ivan Vucic from DS; Jovan Rankovic from DSS).

Not only that the authors are not counting on the acceptance of their ideas by the so called left-wing parties (SPS, JUL and ND), but they explicitly reject this possibility. The document is, they say, intended for all political forces in the country, except the team in power in Serbia and its political satellites. The condition sine qua non for the reforms is the change of the government whose personification is the personalized oligarchy. All the while, any implicit estimate of the possibility of its replacement is rejected. The experts even quote the realistic basis for the preservation of the existing government until 2003. As Mladjan Dinkic explains, "the government can stay in power until 2003 with no major problems, if the most profitable parts of industry are sold." It would conduct the reforms "only if it must", and, according to Dinkic's belief, only between 2004 and 2010, after the bankruptcy of the economy and after everything available for sale is sold.

All other relevant political forces in the country, including the wing of the Montenegrin socialists led by Milica Pejanovic-Djurisic, have been informed about the program, and the experts are expecting to see who will show interest to get better acquainted with it. The joining of economists belonging to different parties is no guarantee whatsoever that the latest story about fast and comprehensive reforms will be backed up by a relevant political party. First, because some of those experts who joined the program have not done so out of sincere belief (but to avoid to offend some of the names from the list, although they would gladly do so to some others), and second, because Mr. Dinkic himself has accused some parties (the Social Democrats and the Coalition Zajedno) of adopting some ideas of the Group 17 and presenting them as their own (what else could they have adopted when there's nothing original in it is another matter). Now, if the experts, out of vanity, start disputes among themselves about who has read more foreign books and rewritten the texts, who has heard more on various seminars and usurped it... The hope remains that 35 economists behind this program are right when they express their trust in the power of public, critically-colored and properly reasoned ideas, which are without a shade of doubt there on 157 pages of the offered Program of Radical Economic Reforms in FR Yugoslavia.