The power and prejudice of political discrimination

The politicization of law, its instrumentalization and the land of confusion and political manipulation with the true formats of European values, are the only benefits we have received in recent years from the indecency and populist attacks of those who, in the absence of popular support, offer obvious resistance to change. This is clearly seen in the centralization and increase of the interests of political elites, which hinder the solution of internal problems in the state, in encouraging national divisions and conflicts, in order to strengthen their authority and political power. In contrast, Montenegrin citizens, after decades of hoping for a better life, have a genuine interest in avoiding the dominance of the power of the elite and ensuring their own peace and prosperity for the country and the generations whose time is coming. But the balance between mass dissatisfaction or support for the new political dominance shifted and shifts from day to day, to become evident today in the discussion of whether Mr. Milojko Spajić meets all the conditions for the presidential candidacy.

The political crisis in Montenegro requires political responses that include a plurality of actors, and not the abuse of institutions for political gain. All answers will provide an essential framework for understanding the situation, how the interpretation of values ​​implies political criteria and affects all citizens, i.e. the current crisis in the state: in the light of politics as rivalry over conflict (political culture of the community), politics as conflict over resources (goals and ways in finding political solutions to problems), politics only as a struggle for power. The "Zet" laws, various political engineers and numerous other occasions of politicization and instrumentalization of rights that we have witnessed clearly lead us to the conclusion that rivalry and conflicts over resources (voters) have become the main sources of interpretation of rights in contesting Mr. Milojko Spajić's candidacy for the President of Montenegro. , while personal sensitivities, personal interests and personal vanities have become the only measure of Montenegrin politics, in the only struggle — only for power.

We really have a lot of critical problems in the country. Is their solution necessary for further politicization and instrumentalization of rights to continue the agony of division and state confusion? Democracy begins with dialogue and rests on the principles of majority rule and individual rights. The concept of the rule of law encompasses a number of different principles, each of which can be summed up in the statement that "no one is above the law". The attitudes and behaviors shown in the interpretation of values ​​point to the complexity of the crisis in society, while political elites continue to see and experience the crisis subjectively. But this is not what state authorities and institutions should do in terms of democracy and the rule of law.

There are various competing theories and methods of legal interpretation, with arguments for and against. These are, for example, textualism, originalism, intentionalism and purposiveness. Which theory is correct, what are the advantages and disadvantages of different theories are also important in the matter of interpretation. However, in this particular case, Mr. Milojko Spajić and every citizen of Montenegro deserves equal access to the interpretation of the law. Above all, there is a fundamental question that arises, which is what constitutes legal interpretation in Montenegrin practice? More specifically, what does legal interpretation require by its very nature? And, what is the constitutive goal of interpreting law in domestic practice? According to the Law on the Election of the President of Montenegro (Article 6), it is prescribed, among other things, that a certificate of the candidate's right to vote, a certificate of the candidate's residence, and a certificate of citizenship must be submitted with the candidacy proposal.

Therefore, the subject of interpretation is the general text and according to publicly available information, Mr. Milojko Spajić has fulfilled the required legal conditions for candidacy. In this regard, regardless of whether such legal interpretation represents a unifying theory, Montenegrin practice is still superior to other methods of interpretation in considering each type of text separately (equality before the law).

Moreover, even with purposive interpretation, which allows lawyers and scholars to approach all legal texts in search of "rationality," it even then requires legal interpreters to remain sensitive to important differences in practice. And that is what the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Montenegro did by issuing a certificate to Mr. Milojko Spajić that he can run for President of Montenegro. Therefore, legal interpretation starts from certain inputs, namely the legal text (Law on the Election of the President of Montenegro), Montenegrin practice, actions and customs in the interpretation of law. This creates a result — "interpretation", while the current practice of legal interpretation decades ago is "by its nature correct", and there is no reason why it should be an exception in the case of Mr. Milojko Spajić. And if that happens, by its very nature, it will not and cannot be a "legal interpretation about the meaning of a law", but a mental characteristic of previous times (single-mindedness) and resentment of political elites due to the mass mood of people for real changes.

The author is a professor of law, a scholar at the Williams Institute of the University of California School of Law (UCLA School of Law), a Postdoctoral Fellow at Lund University in Sweden, and a multiple recipient of the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD).