Advocating the idea of passing a law on agents of foreign influence is a repressive measure under the guise of protecting the "interests of voters and citizens of Montenegro", which actually aims to target non-governmental organizations, label them "agencies" and stifle public criticism, the Center for Democratic Transition (CDT) announced ).
They said that in Montenegro, which is a democratic country according to the Constitution, part of the Government is trying to pave the way for anti-democratic practices and stifle the critical thought of the civil sector through the announcement of that law.
Instead of, as is done in democratic countries, considering and taking into account the criticisms coming from the civil sector, which aim to improve state policies, the authorities decide to deal with dissidents, as authoritarian regimes do in Russia, they said from and NGOs.
"The initiators of this proposal, the coalition 'For the future of Montenegro', resorted to replacing theses in an attempt to justify the mentioned law, so they falsely claimed that it was modeled after the American law 'Foreign agents registration act' (FARA). CDT pointed to crucial differences and the fact that the ZBCG proposal is far from the American FARA. This was followed by a labeling campaign of NGO activists, with the explanation of the ruling coalition that the announcement of the law on foreign agents "drove all the rabbits out of the bushes". said to be incorrect, claiming that non-governmental organizations hide their finances, that their work is non-transparent, outside the law, and that they do not pay taxes," CDT writes.
In the public discourse, they add, a narrative appeared in which the media, as well as individuals, try to lump the law that practically declares non-governmental organizations as spies with the initiative submitted by the CDT back in 2021, which concerns the establishment of the Parliamentary Committee for monitoring of foreign influences.
"An example of this kind of reporting is In4s and Borba, portals sympathetic to the authorities in Russia and Serbia, including the coalition 'For the Future of Montenegro,' which in their texts manipulate the public in such a way that they present absurd arguments and target the executive director of CDT, Dragan Koprivica. In4s and Borba are trying to delegitimize the assessment of the Law on Agents of Foreign Influence, which Koprivica characterized as an anti-European and anti-Western idea of a part of the ruling majority, presenting his position as contradictory to the earlier requests and appeals of the CDT to establish a Committee for Monitoring Foreign Influences. they say from that NGO.
They explained that CDT's initiative to establish a Committee for Monitoring Foreign Influences was prepared on the model of the Special Committee for Foreign Interference in All Democratic Processes in the European Union (INGE), which operates within the European Parliament (EP).
"In the last few years, political, media and economic influences, of lesser or greater intensity, an increase in violence, radicalization of public discourse, suspicions of illegal financing from abroad, uncontrolled economic inflow into key sectors, and the use of disinformation campaigns to encourage polarization have been recorded in Montenegro. The fact that the state does not have a systemic response to the increasingly evident presence of various malignant influences, nor an effective system of institutions that would continuously deal with these phenomena, pointed to the need to establish a special body that would deal with these issues, such as a special committee operating within the EP ".
The mandate of the INGE board, they point out, was to assess the level of foreign threats in different spheres: major national and European elections across the EU; disinformation campaigns on traditional and social media to shape public opinion; cyber attacks targeting critical infrastructure; direct and indirect financial support and economic coercion of political actors and subversion of civil society.
The importance of the INGE committee is reflected in the systemic approach in the fight against foreign influences, providing recommendations and methods necessary for the protection of democratic values within the EU, CDT points out.
According to the model of the EP committee, as they said, the proposal of that NGO implied the establishment of a working body in the Assembly that would deal with monitoring possible foreign interference in all democratic processes in Montenegro and controlling the effects of the Government in that field.
"The basic idea of establishing the Committee is based on providing a joint, comprehensive and long-term approach to solving the issue of foreign interference in democratic institutions and processes, direct and indirect political, financial support, and economic coercion of political actors, disinformation campaigns from abroad and other activities".
The formation of the board is a systemic initiative to defend democratic and European values, while the law on foreign agents is their direct destruction, CDT says.
"The INGE committee, based on the model of the CDT's initiative to establish the Committee for Monitoring Foreign Influence, and the initiative to adopt the Law on Agents of Foreign Influence are diametrically different. INGE deals with the challenges arising from foreign interference in democratic processes, while the laws on 'foreign agents', created on the Russian model, are aimed at the actors themselves, often targeting civil society organizations and the media."
The committee operating within the EP focuses on research and identification of specific problems such as disinformation, hybrid threats and security risks from foreign actors, with the aim of preserving the integrity of the democratic environment. Its work does not imply limiting or labeling non-governmental organizations and media that receive funds from abroad, but rather seeks to strengthen the resilience and security of democratic processes in the EU, CDT points out.
In contrast, laws on foreign agents often use the label "foreign agent" as a means to stigmatize and suppress non-governmental organizations and media that may criticize the authorities, said the NGO, assessing that such laws create a hostile environment for actors from civil society and the media, making it difficult their work and participation.
"On the other hand, the INGE committee is directed towards solving the problem of systemic foreign influence, and not towards suppressing freedom of expression or association. The committee's focus is on preserving democratic values and creating an open environment in which civil society, media and citizens can freely participate in public life , without fear of censorship or discrimination."
Linguistic coincidence in the form of the phrase "foreign influence" in the names of the Committee for Monitoring Foreign Influences, modeled on the INGE Committee, and the Law on Agents of Foreign Influence, say the CDT, cannot hide the essential differences in the goals of those proposals - "one is guided by the protection and preservation of democratic processes in the country, and the other by repressive intentions and dealing with dissenters".
CDT also indicates that they are European institutions raised their voice against legal solutions similar to the one proposed by ZBCG, which were initiated or adopted in certain countries.
"The European Court of Human Rights in the Ecodefence and Others v. Russia case found that Russia violated basic human rights and freedoms, and the EU Court of Justice, in a ruling related to the Hungarian Law on the Transparency of Organizations Receiving Support from Abroad, concluded that is legislation that requires certain civil society organizations, which receive support from abroad above a certain threshold, to register, declare and publish their sources of funding, and provides for sanctions in case of non-compliance, discriminatory and unjustified."
They remind that in 2014, the Kyrgyz parliament rejected the draft law on foreign agents, which is called a copy of the Russian one, because it was deemed undemocratic. The law was finally adopted in April this year, which led to criticism from international organizations, as well as the USA and the EU.
"International cooperation and support for the achievement of what is the priority goal of the state - membership in the EU and credible membership in NATO, cannot be equated with malignant foreign influence, because it is clear that we are talking about replacing theses, just as it is also clear that without free criticism, democracy becomes vulnerable to manipulation. You can appreciate the similarity of these two proposals based on the fact that the EU suspended negotiations with Georgia due to a legal solution similar to the one advocated by the ZBCG, and that the EU itself has a similar body proposed by the CDT institution. Therefore, the purpose and goal are what determine the norm."
Despite the arguments about transparency and the fight against foreign influences, the rhetoric of the ruling coalition ZBCG clearly shows the intention - that the law will be used to stigmatize and punish critical voices in society, CDT announced.
Bonus video:
