Soldiers receive limited overtime pay

The Government believes that a professional military person, for the days in which he is entitled to the internal service allowance, is not entitled to an increase in salary for working longer than full-time hours, working at night, and working on days that are legally designated as religious, state, and other holidays in Montenegro.

This was stated in the opinion adopted by the Government at the initiative of lawyer Kasalica Makedonka, submitted to the Constitutional Court, in which she believes that Article 23, paragraph 5 of the Regulation on Salaries of Persons Serving in the Army of Montenegro, which prescribes this, violates the Law on Salaries of Employees in the Public Sector and the constitutionally guaranteed rights of professional military personnel.

"Contrary to the allegations in the initiative, the provision of Article 23, paragraph 5 of the Regulation is not in conflict with the Law on Salaries of Public Sector Employees, because this law stipulates that the allowance for night work, work on public or religious holidays and work longer than full-time working hours (overtime work) constitutes a supplement to the basic salary, just as the allowance for internal service is. It should be borne in mind that the legislator has given the right to regulate salary supplements in more detail by a Government regulation, as previously stated (Article 17, paragraph 4 of the Law on Salaries of Public Sector Employees)," it was stated, among other things, in the Government's explanation of why it believes that the Constitutional Court should reject this initiative by lawyer Makedonka.

The government believes that the initiative to review the constitutionality of Article 106 of the Law on Games of Chance, submitted by the Association of Game Organizers, its members and six of their legal representatives, including former constitutional judge Prof. Dr. Blagota Mitrić, should also be rejected.

This article refers to the fact that all organizers of games of chance, after the entry into force of this law, which was adopted at the end of July this year, will have their previous concessions terminated, regardless of how long they are valid and how many years they have already been paid for. The article stipulates that the right to organize games of chance is no longer obtained through concessions, but through administrative contracts, for which organizers will submit separate requests.

The organizers believe that this prevents them from operating for the period for which they have been granted concessions, and that the termination of these concessions before their expiration means retroactive application of the law, which according to the Constitution is only possible if the existence of public interest is established, which in this case the legislator did not establish.

The government believes in its opinion that shortening the duration of concessions does not mean that the law has retroactive application.

"The Constitution does not recognize the institute of acquired rights, but only constitutional rights, and the right to organize games of chance is not a constitutional right, which as such could be violated and thus cause damage to someone. The state, or the legislator, has the right to change legal solutions, adapt them to economic, social and other relevant circumstances and circumstances in the state, and even to regulate some rights in a way that may be less favorable for the beneficiaries of the rights than the previous one. The initiators of the initiative cite this right of the legislator in their initiative," the Government's opinion stated.

The government believes that the initiative to review the constitutionality of Article 17 of the Law on Bankruptcy and Liquidation of Banks, which stipulates that “Costs in court disputes related to administrative acts shall be borne by the bank”, should be rejected. The initiative was submitted by lawyer Filip Ćupić, who states that a bankrupt bank is not a party to these proceedings and therefore cannot appeal against court decisions to pay court costs, but requests that these costs be borne by the Central Bank, which oversees the bankruptcy.

The government states in its explanation that the Law on Bankruptcy and Liquidation of Banks stipulates that banks must cover all costs arising from the bankruptcy proceedings from the bankruptcy estate.

Different fees for pre- and post-law masters

The Government believes that two initiatives submitted to the Constitutional Court for the assessment of the article of the Sectoral Collective Agreement for the field of administration and judiciary, which reads: "The basic salary of an employee is increased based on the scientific title: - Master of Science/Master by 0,80 of the calculation value of the coefficient expressed in gross amount, if this scientific title was acquired in accordance with the regulations that were in force before the entry into force of the Law on Amendments to the Law on Higher Education."

Separate initiatives for the review of the constitutionality of this article were submitted by Danilo Pajović and Aleksandra Vukčević.

They believe that this solution is clearly discriminatory and leads to unequal treatment of employees who earned a master's degree through a program enrolled after the entry into force of the aforementioned law.

The government states in its explanation that the amendments to the Law on Higher Education have completely transformed the higher education system, abolishing the previously valid model of master's studies and establishing a new structure of the study cycle, which is stated in the Collective Agreement.