Constitutional Court: New Central Bank tariff under constitutional court control

The Constitutional Court has initiated ex officio a new procedure to assess the constitutionality and legality of the tariff according to which the Central Bank of Montenegro calculates fees for its services, after, as a reminder, that institution amended the disputed regulation on two occasions, before being informed of the court's legal positions.

"The court considers that in this way the conditions are formally created for rejecting the initiative, without essentially eliminating possible unconstitutionality, thus calling into question the principle of the rule of law," the statement reads.

On October 15, the Constitutional Court, acting on the initiative of the Protector of Property and Legal Interests, initiated the procedure for assessing the constitutionality and legality of the Central Bank Tariff. Before the decision was delivered to the parties so that they could familiarize themselves with the court's legal positions, the Central Bank amended the disputed act on November 20.

"This caused the Constitutional Court to adopt a request for review of its own Decision on December 3, that is, to review the amended Tariff of the Central Bank."

Although this Decision was not sent to the parties at that time for them to act on it, the Constitutional Court adds, the Central Bank issued a completely new Decision on Tariffs on December 15, proposing to the court to suspend the proceedings because the disputed regulation had ceased to be valid.

"The Constitutional Court decided to initiate proceedings for the assessment of constitutionality and legality itself due to the fact that the court's decisions could not be sent to the parties, precisely because of the two changes implemented by the Central Bank, without even being informed of the constitutional and legal reasons that led the Constitutional Court to initiate proceedings. In this way, the principle of the rule of law is not being implemented, but rather the conditions are only formally met for the Constitutional Court to reject the initiative," the statement reads.

Additionally, the court re-initiated the proceedings because the Central Bank Council "did not prescribe sufficient and measurable criteria for determining the level of the tariff at which fees for services provided by the Central Bank are calculated, even in the new Decision on Tariffs."

EU directives and regulations, the Constitutional Court adds, provide recommendations on how fees can be calculated, but at the national level it is the obligation and responsibility of the Central Bank Council to satisfy the principles set out in the Constitution.

"The Constitutional Court considers that, although a new Decision with additional reasoning was adopted, from the perspective of the constitutional requirement of the rule of law, the criteria and actual costs that determine the distinction between the Main State Treasury and other payment system users in this way are not clear," the decision on the initiation of the procedure states.

The Central Bank is obliged, the decision states, to present clear criteria for why it is necessary for the fee for the state treasury to be a percentage, and for other payment system users to be fixed, especially taking into account European Union regulations and the practice of the European Court of Human Rights.

See more: