The decision of the Constitutional Court rejecting the initiative for the review of the constitutionality of the Law on the Conversion of Loans in Swiss Francs with a strong and clear explanation confirms that the lawyers of the defrauded clients continuously advocated the correct positions and correctly interpreted the legal norms. This is what Dragomir Ćalasan, the lawyer of the Consumer Protection Center (CEZAP), said in an interview with "Vijesti".
The Constitutional Court assessed that the state of Montenegro during the period when loans with a currency clause in Swiss francs were approved (2006-2008) did not have an adequate legal solution that would protect the consumers who took these loans from the consequences of the enormous growth of the Swiss franc and neutralize the risk that , by contracting the currency clause, completely passed on to the debtors. That assessment is found in the decision of the Constitutional Court, which rejected the initiative of Adiko Bank and factoring company Heta to declare the law on the conversion of loans in Swiss francs into euros unconstitutional. Adiko banka, then Hipo Alpe Adria banka, was the only one to approve disputed loans.
The Constitutional Court judged that the Assembly's decision to enact the law was legally valid, because the legislator had a legitimate goal of "increasing the social protection of consumers, preventing unfair business practices by credit institutions and preventing the deepening of the debt crisis."
The Constitutional Court did not receive an opinion from the Government on the allegations from the initiative, but the Government provided them with a copy of the opinion on the draft law that it sent to the Parliament in 2015. In that opinion, the executive power did not support the bill submitted to the parliamentary procedure by the opposition.
"We indicated to the courts that they should apply the norms governing the issues of contracts indexed in Swiss francs. Here, above all, we mean Directive EEC 93/13 2014/2017 of the European Parliament, case law of the European Court of Justice, which find their application in the ratified Stabilization and Association Agreement. All of these European regulations are in no way in conflict with domestic legislation (the Law on Obligations, the Law on Consumer Protection, the Law on Consumer Credit). The essence of the decision of the Constitutional Court is that it supported the application of a balanced relationship between banks and their clients," Ćalasan said.
In CEZAP, they pointed out that the Constitutional Court's assessment that when the law was passed was valid because the legislator (parliament) had a legitimate goal - increasing social protection of consumers, preventing unfair business practices of credit institutions and preventing the deepening of the debt crisis.
"Namely, the transfer of the entire currency risk to the consumer, as ordered by the Constitutional Court, resulted in the fact that after several years of regular repayment, users of loans in Swiss francs were more indebted than at the time when they entered into contracts, which makes the relationship between credit institutions and these consumers unbalanced and unfair", said Ćalasan.
He pointed out that the decision of the Constitutional Court opened the eyes of many in Montenegro, and contributed to the country's staying on the European path and integration in the society of states that want to be legally regulated states.
The CBCG had to point out the dangers of taking loans from the Swiss
Ćalasan said that it remains to be seen how the petitioners (Adiko banka and Heta), as well as the Central Bank (CBCG), which was directly called out by this decision, will react to the views of the Constitutional Court.
"CBCG, as the regulator of the monetary market, had to use a public campaign to educate citizens about the dangers of indexation of loans in Swiss francs and the accompanying currency risk to prevent unwanted consequences. For the initiators of the initiative, it is clear (we have emphasized this countless times) that they do not even care to operate according to the law. They came here to fraudulently collect extra profit and leave this banking market. That was obvious, and the change in the ownership structure itself, and the change in owner, confirms it," said Ćalasan.
He said that they were surprised by the attitude of the CBCG, which taught them the law through its "legal experts".
"Let those experts carefully study the views of the Constitutional Court, or they will, as before, make sense of similar views of the Supreme Court, because it is obvious that the bank does not accept any decision that is not in their interest," Ćalasan said.
Bonus video:
