Should DPS be banned?

For the purposes of this text, let us start by using concepts that have strongly shaped contemporary political thought.

Political evil (Arendt, Havel, Jaspers) denotes a moral and social phenomenon in which destruction is manifested not only through violence, but also through everyday administrative practices that destroy the dignity, freedom and ability of citizens to act politically. Arendt called this phenomenon the banality of evil - evil that comes not from hatred, but from obedience and routine.

The pathology of power (Russell) describes psychological deformation of the political elite which turns power into an end in itself. The result is a sense of untouchability, arrogance, and a loss of connection to the public good.

Systemic corruption (Klitgaard) represents a state in which corruption is not an incident, but the very structure of the order. Clientelism and nepotism become the way the state functions, and justice - the exception.

State capture (Hellman) denotes the process in which private interests and oligarchs take control of institutions, laws, and public policies, using corruption as a mechanism of domination.

Understanding these concepts is key to understanding that corruption in Montenegro is not only an economic or legal problem, but a deeply civilizational, social and moral one. It destroys the community not only through the theft of resources, but also through the silent destruction of trust, the dignity of institutions and the sense of the public good and the state itself. Confronting it is therefore not only a matter of law, but also a matter of moral and institutional renewal of society and the establishment of new state foundations.

The aim of this text is to show the anatomy of such a system - to explain how political evil took root, why it survived, and how, in the light of the post-DPS era, a society that is just learning to separate the state from the parties can overcome it.

ROOTS OF DPS “EVIL”: The Genesis of Unlimited Power

After the 1990s, Montenegro entered a transition without catharsis and without true democratization. The League of Communists formally transformed into the Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS), but retained the old power relations - a monopoly over institutions, employment along party lines, loyalty instead of competence, and complete control over state resources. Thus, a system was created in which corruption and clientelism became structural, and the state was effectively captured.

The long-term dominance of the DPS was not a sign of stability, but a symptom of the unbroken continuity of the authoritarian order. Real power was concentrated in a narrow, informal circle around the “leader”. This is precisely where it is reflected the banality of evil: injustice is not (only) done violently, but also quietly, orderly, through obedience. A system has been established in which the police, prosecutor's office, courts and administration function as an apparatus of obedience, and the law serves to protect those who violate it.

State privatization

Privatization in Montenegro was not market-based, but party-based and crony-based. State property passed into the hands of politically suitable individuals, creating an oligarchic class formed by the merging of politics, business and crime. Power ceased to be ideological, it became economic - control of resources instead of ideas and institutions alone.

The mechanisms of state capture were visible: impunity for political elites, laws tailored to interest groups, and selective application of law. Evil was no longer hidden - it was legalized and normalized. The state became a service to party power, and the public interest its private property.

SHOULD DPS BE BANNED: Between justice and revenge

The issue of banning a party is a test of the maturity of any democracy. European practice shows that a party can only be banned if it directly threatens the constitutional order and the foundations of democracy. According to the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (case Welfare Party), a ban is only possible when the party seeks to abolish basic freedoms and implements it through undemocratic means.

In the case of DPS, although systemic corruption had undermined institutions and the rule of law, the party did not openly seek to abolish the constitutional order. Its destruction was functional, not ideological - the capture of institutions, not the overthrow of the Constitution. Therefore, a ban, although morally understandable, would be legally untenable and politically counterproductive: it would create a myth of persecution and allow the same network to reorganize under different names.

German and Spanish precedents show that a formal ban does not destroy the system - it only forces it into a new form. Society is not liberated by decree, but by dismantling the privileges that maintain power.

HEALING A SICK SOCIETY: Truth as the Beginning of Healing

The response to a captured state cannot be symbolic or vindictive - it must be institutional. Reform must break up the networks of personalities, capital, and interests that constitute the “new class” and reconstruct trust in public institutions.

Lustration and vetting - moral and institutional catharsis

Without a clear ethical demarcation between the old and new order, any reform remains cosmetic. Lustration It is not revenge, but an act of moral and institutional cleansing of the state apparatus. Its purpose is not to punish the past, but to protect the future.

It implies a ban on holding public office for persons who have knowingly and systematically undermined the rule of law, abused institutions, or participated in repressive and corrupt government structures. Vetting must become the basis of the institutional renewal of Montenegro. This is not a technical procedure, but a moral line. The state must clearly demonstrate that those who destroyed the system cannot be its reformers. Without this ethical demarcation, the new order will be just a continuation of the old, with new names and the same habits.

Confiscation of illegally acquired assets - dismantling the economic power of corruption

Corruption is not destroyed by moral appeal, but by economic decapitalization those who created it. The Law of civil forfeiture must become the main instrument of justice and citizens' trust. Such laws exist in most European Union countries and allow property to be seized without a criminal conviction, if it is proven to be disproportionate to the legal income. In Montenegro, the confiscation of illegally acquired property must become symbol of moral justice - a measure that restores the trust of citizens and breaks the financial foundations of the corruption network that has fed the party-clientelistic system for decades. The law must also contain provision on the non-statutory limitation of high corruption, because corruption at the highest levels - prime minister, president, ministers, directors - must never become obsolete.

The statute of limitations in such cases is not a legal, but a moral defeat: institutional forgiveness without recognition and punishment is not reconciliation, but a prolongation of the injustice.

Financial sanctions on parties - a model of institutional accountability

Corruption is not possible without systemic financial sustainability.

Therefore, it is necessary to introduce a clear mechanism financial discipline of political parties that have been proven to have misused public resources. In the Montenegrin context, this means that parties that have systematically misused state funds for the purpose of party domination should be temporarily suspend budget funding, for a period of five to ten years.

This measure does not restrict freedom of association, but it does interrupt continuity of abuse and separates the state from the party. At the same time, individuals who have held high positions and have been proven to have participated in serious corruption must be subjected to lifetime ban from holding public office. It is not a punishment, but protection of society from the repetition of the same pattern of power and the moral degeneration of government.

Institutional morality as the foundation of a new state

The fight against systemic corruption is not just a matter of law, but also a matter of sense of the stateLustration, vetting, asset confiscation and financial sanctions are not instruments of revenge, but mechanisms of institutional morality. Their goal is not to act from the past, but from the future - to never again repeat an order in which obedience, fear, and corruption were substitutes for ability, integrity, and honesty. A state that fails to draw a clear moral line between abuse and responsibility, between the past and the future, is condemned to live forever in the gray area between injustice and fear.

LIMITING THE INFLUENCE OF OLIGARHS AND CRIMINALS

The Montenegrin transition has produced a form of feudal capitalism - a combination of party, business and crime. The oligarchy does not destroy institutions, but absorbs them. Courts, banks and regulatory agencies are becoming the service of the powerful.

Confiscation of assets and financial isolation of these networks are the only realistic way to break the captive system. International cooperation with the EU, OLAF and Europol must become part of the strategy. The trail of money leads to the roots of power.

An economy without ethics is an extension of crime. Society must restore the cult of work and honesty. Work must have meaning and dignity; greed - a price.

BETWEEN EVIL AND FREEDOM

Montenegro today stands between the past and the future, between fear and responsibility. Three decades of one-party rule have shaped a society of obedience, in which evil has become routine. But it disappears the moment people stop participating. Freedom does not begin with a revolution or a march., but by a personal decision not to agree to lies and corruption. Evil persists as long as people refuse to think and judge. The end of the DPS era does not come by decree or court decision, but by the moral maturation of society and the restoration of institutional responsibility, morality and trust - the moment when power once again becomes a service, not a privilege. Then a Montenegro of truth, freedom, dignity and solidarity can emerge: a republic of responsibility, conscience and decency, not a republic of fear and corruption.

Prof. Eugen Popović is a pseudonym; the author's name is known to the editorial staff.