Posted on

Pandemic Management: Lessons Learned for a More Secure Future

Although Montenegro handled the COVID-19 crisis effectively in the early beginnings, having in mind that the first measures were introduced even before the first case was registered, as the time went by, systemic flaws were revealed. The fact that two different governments were in power during the COVID-19 crisis in Montenegro, reflected on the extent of oppressiveness of the introduced measures and resulted in different approaches. Citizens highly supported severe measures during the first wave of the pandemic, but support for the measures declined as the time went by. Selective information sharing, unclear communication of measures, violation of human rights and breaching of the Constitution contributed to the negative public attitudes towards the relevant authorities. Lack of institutional proactivity in oversight of Government’s decision-making was obvious with regards to the Parliament, the Constitutional Court and the Agency for Personal Data Protection, who failed to protect the rights of the citizens of Montenegro. When it comes to the procurement of vaccines, protective equipment and COVID-19 tests, at first Montenegro mainly relied on donations from other countries and organisations. Later the purchases of these means were conducted through non-transparent and partly unsuccessful procurement procedures. However, the cooperation with WHO and EU was on a high level, demonstrated through joint activities and projects carried out throughout the pandemic.

More details in the analysis of the response of Montenegro to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Posted on

For Montenegro, there is no other choice but EU integration

On Wednesday, April 12, the first in a series of BSC Leaders Meetings was held in Podgorica, under the title “Montenegro after the presidential elections: Fast forward towards the EU?”, organised by the Belgrade Centre for Security Policy and the Institute Alternative.

Jakov Milatović, President-elect of Montenegro, Dritan Abazović, Prime Minister of Montenegro, Rosa Balfour, director of Carnegie Europe, Milena Muk, researcher at the Institute Alternative, dr Srđan Cvijić, president of the International Advisory Committee of the Belgrade Centre for Security Policy and Igor Bandović, director of the Belgrade Centre for Security Policy, took part in the public panel discussion. 

Igor Bandović, who opened the BSC Leaders Meetings event, expressed in the opening remarks his great pleasure to organise the first event of this kind in Podgorica. “The Belgrade Security Conference aims to be a window to the world for the entire region of the Western Balkans and a promoter of positive changes in the Balkans. Relying on the experience of our partners from Munich, we decided to organise Leaders Meetings events throughout the countries of the Western Balkans and thus initiate the creation of a new political culture, a new style of debates and new content to promote.” 

The main topics of the panel discussion, organised in the aftermath of the presidential elections, were the possible scenarios of Montenegro’s accession to the European Union, the main obstacles and opportunities, as well as the EU’s political capacity to receive new members and Montenegro’s ability to reform. 

On that occasion, the newly elected President of Montenegro, Jakov Milatović, said that the new generation of politicians is a symbol of changes in the country and that the main priorities of Montenegro should be the fight against state capture and economic stability. “Regional economic integration is the basis of European integration. The success of one Western Balkan country is the success of all six of them,” Milatović pointed out.

At the first BSC Leaders Meetings event, the Prime Minister of Montenegro, Dritan Abazović, said that for Montenegro, there is no other choice but EU integration. “By joining the EU, Montenegro will fulfil its national interests, which is the reason why it will remain committed to the process of European integration.” Referring to the war in Ukraine, Abazović said: “Considering the size, population and capacities of Montenegro, support for Ukraine is more than significant, and citizens of Ukraine feel safe in Montenegro.” 

Rosa Balfour, director of Carnegie Europe, pointed out that the enlargement process has become more complex. “The importance of the rule of law, civil society and political leaders who send strong messages at home are considered crucial to the process of European integration.” 

On behalf of the Institute Alternative, Milena Muk stated that the previous Montenegrin governments did not meet high expectations and did not achieve sufficient progress in reforms. “Montenegro currently does not have a single institution at full capacity, but in the so-called acting condition. Responding to Srđan Cvijić’s question about the main priorities of the future government, Milena Muk highlighted the reforms and the fulfillment of temporary criteria within Chapter 23. – “I think it is positive that the European Union has become more clear and more direct in conditioning key reforms in the country, and it should persist in that approach. We see that individual islands of integrity are being created, primarily in the Special State Prosecutor’s Office, and it is up to us to demand multiplying of these islands.” 

The BSC Leaders Meetings events, with the distinguished panel of international and domestic speakers, are planned to continue in the coming months in other capitals of the Western Balkans. 

Institute alternative
Belgrade Centre for Security Policy

Posted on

The Constitutional Court to resolve the deep crisis of the political system: Stop the domino effect of irresponsible decisions

We appeal to the Parliament and the Government of Montenegro to cease the practice of debating bills, which do not meet the elementary criteria of public participation, especially in the current context of the crisis of the legitimacy of the political system. Furthermore, we appeal to the Constitutional Court to promptly decide on a series of acts that caused the current crisis.

The Constitutional Court should make decisions upon the initiatives to review the constitutionality of the amendments to the Law on the President, as well as a series of related acts.

After the decree on the dissolution of the Parliament, its members have already voted for problematic changes to the Law on Local Self-Government, which the Institute Alternative previously warned would degrade the employment system at the local level, and also limit the jurisdiction of local election commissions.

Eight bills have been submitted to the parliamentary procedure since the decree on the dissolution of the Parliament was passed. Six of them were initiated by MPs without adequate assessment of the financial and other impact of the regulations, alongside inadequate public participation. Some of these proposals regulate significant areas with a potentially large fiscal impact, all without an estimated amount of necessary financial resources. Amendments to the Law on pension and disability insurance are, in this sense, particularly singled out, as in accompanying justification it is only stated that it is “necessary to allocate additional funds based on the assessment of competent institutions the number of potential beneficiaries”.

On the other hand, on April 3rd, the Government determined the amendments to the Law on civil procedure, without previously conducting a public discussion and regulatory impact analysis, and submitted them to the Parliament. In the following explanation, which was also submitted, the absence of a public discussion was justified by the small scale of amendments to the aforementioned law, which, as they claimed, aims to harmonise with the provisions of the draft of the Law on amendments to the law on confiscation of assets gained from criminal activity.

Also, the draft of the Law on amendments to the law on confiscation of assets gained from criminal activity was passed without public discussion, which is an additional problem that points to a widespread accountability crisis and the degradation of citizen participation in the decision-making process.

The legal framework did not regulate the jurisdiction of the Parliament after its dissolution, while the President of Montenegro did not sign a series of legal solutions voted on in the meantime. Therefore, in the context of vague legal provisions, the role of the Constitutional Court is even more important and the proactivity of the judges of this court is necessary in order to stop the further “domino effect” of irresponsible political decisions.

Milena Muk
Institute alternative