The Center for Democratic Transition (CDT) called on the Government of Montenegro to withdraw from the parliamentary procedure the proposal for amendments to the Law on confiscation of property benefits obtained through criminal activity, said the deputy executive director of the Center, Biljana Papović.
"We call on the members of parliament not to vote for the proposal in this form. In this sense, we believe that the proposal of colleagues from MANS to start wider consultations on this regulation is very rational and necessary," Papović pointed out.
She called on the Government, the parliamentary majority and all MPs to stop conducting the process of "accession" to the European Union in such a way that they conflict with the policies of the Union almost every day.
"We remind you that the current government's promise while they were in the opposition is to return to the state what was stolen from it, that is, a broad review of the clear differences that exist in the lifestyle and income of many former and current state officials and tycoons close to them," the CDT statement states. -a.
As they say, it should bring the necessary and promised justice.
"Nevertheless, anyone who takes a detailed look at the proposed model will be completely clear that all those who illegally benefited from the state can calmly spend and increase those assets," Papović emphasized.
He adds that the draft law on amendments to the Law on confiscation of property benefits obtained through criminal activity is no guarantee that these practices will stop.
"On the contrary, this proposal is not aligned with the legal system and may even threaten the existing system of confiscation of property benefits acquired through criminal activity. It is surprising that we managed to get such an act, after years of waiting and pompous announcements about a decisive battle with those who have illegally enriched themselves Papović pointed out.
He emphasizes that they are worried because in the preparation of the law there was complete closure of the Government and a reluctance to hear a different opinion, which is not characteristic of democratic societies.
As he says, "it is quite clear that its preparation was accompanied by ignoring the opinion of the European Commission, because according to their assessment, it is necessary to review this act through the process of public consultations and consultations with representatives of the judiciary. This behavior becomes common when it comes to the actions of the Government, but and Parliament".
She invited all relevant actors to evaluate this bill.
"As our contribution to that process, we present a brief analysis of the key features of the bill on property," the announcement states.
"If such a law is adopted, there is a significant danger that the confiscation of property acquired through criminal activity will be unenforceable in practice, so instead of improving it, the current opportunities offered by the existing system would be eliminated," said Papović.
He adds that "the concept of permanent confiscation of property from persons who are only suspected of certain criminal acts but not legally convicted is extremely controversial from the point of view of respect for basic human rights. It is questionable that some property can be considered to have been acquired through criminal activity, and that not previously established in criminal proceedings".
He emphasizes that they also noticed the legal superficiality in the bill.
"The proposed law introduces the confiscation of benefits acquired in the period of ten years before and or after the commission of a criminal offense, which is controversial from the aspect of the constitutional principle of the prohibition of the retroactive effect of the law. Although government officials refer to the experience of Slovenia, we remind you that it was in Slovenia that the Constitutional Court abolished certain provisions of the law there because they were contrary to the principle of non-retroactivity," says Papović.
As he says, "the idea of transferring the confiscation of property acquired through criminal activity to civil proceedings is extremely unfinished."
"There are very possible legally absurd situations in which it is established in a civil proceeding that a certain person acquired property through criminal activity, while criminal proceedings are still ongoing. Or, in a civil proceeding, the property is permanently confiscated because it was acquired through criminal activity, and the criminal the proceedings ended with an acquittal," claimed Papović.
He adds that these and other issues create a serious risk of adopting a law that will later be found to be inconsistent with the Constitution and international treaties, and over time the issue of compensation for damages may also be opened.
"Thus, instead of contributing to the fight against corruption and organized crime, this law could turn into its opposite," concluded Papović.
Bonus video:
