The Center for Democratic Transition (CDT) called on MPs in the Parliament of Montenegro not to adopt the Draft Law on Amendments to the Law on Confiscation of Assets Gained from Criminal Activity, because as they say, in this form, it will not produce the results that were proclaimed during its preparations.
"On the contrary, this kind of law enables a significant part of those who have illegally acquired their property to peacefully enjoy it and to further increase it," states the statement signed by Biljana Papović, deputy executive director of CDT.
In the statement, he adds that since the Government has forgotten the pre-election promises made to citizens that a law will be adopted that will enable the review of all those whose lifestyle and assets significantly exceed their income, he calls on the Assembly to do so.
"It is necessary to establish a working body of the Assembly that will prepare a new law in a transparent procedure while respecting the opinions of relevant international institutions and fulfill this pre-election promise, i.e. enable the return to the state of what was stolen from it. The Assembly should actually enable a broad review of clear differences based on the law which exist in the lifestyle and income of many former and current state officials and tycoons close to them. The procedure needs to be set up in such a way that everyone whose property is not related to their income must have the burden of proving the origin of that property before the competent state authorities. In short, we need a law that will bring the necessary and promised justice," the statement reads.
According to him, the draft law that the Government of Montenegro sent to the Parliament for adoption is no guarantee that justice will be served.
"As the CDT and colleagues from the non-governmental sector have warned before, this proposal is not harmonized with the legal system and may even threaten the existing system of confiscation of property benefits acquired through criminal activity," says Papović.
She assessed that it is very worrying that the way this law was prepared was characterized by the complete closure of the Government and the reluctance to hear a different opinion, which is not characteristic of democratic societies.
"In addition, 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. Despite this, the Government has not initiated the necessary consultations with the domestic and the international public," she says.
The CDT reminds of their analysis of the draft law, which, they say, shows that there is a significant danger that confiscation of property acquired through criminal activity will be unenforceable in practice.
"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, without it being previously established in criminal proceedings. The bill introduces the confiscation of benefits acquired in the period of ten years before and/or after the commission of the criminal offense, which is disputed from the aspect of the constitutional principle of prohibition of retroactive effect of the law. Although government officials refer to the experience of Slovenia, we remind you that it was in In Slovenia, the Constitutional Court abolished certain provisions of the law there because they were contrary to the principle of non-retroactivity," said Papović in a statement.
Also, as he says, the idea of transferring the confiscation of property acquired through criminal activity to civil proceedings is extremely incomplete.
"There are very possible legally absurd situations where 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 litigation, the property is permanently confiscated because it was acquired through criminal activity, and the criminal the proceedings end with an acquittal. These and other issues create a serious risk of adopting a law that will later be determined to be inconsistent with the Constitution and international treaties, and over time the question of compensation may also be opened. Thus, instead of contributing to the fight against corruption and organized crime, this law could turn into its opposite," concludes Papović in the statement.
Bonus video:
