The fact that the international community mediates in resolving almost every major political issue in Montenegro, from the 2006 referendum on state independence to last week's agreement between Prime Minister Milojko Spajić with part of the opposition, is a sign, according to ''Vijesti'' interlocutors, of the inferiority and inadequacy of the political class, which is unable to solve problems on its own.
Chief and responsible editor of the weekly "Monitor" Milena Perović, assesses that, instead of cooperating with relevant international institutions or countries in the region, Montenegrin political actors often have a dependent or uncritical attitude towards these addresses. One part of the government is thus, according to her, under the direct control of the "Serbian autocrat (the President of Serbia) Aleksandar Vučić”, while, he says, simultaneously simulating independence and criticizing the interference of foreign embassies in domestic politics.
On the other hand, states Perović, it often happens that Brussels' demands are ignored when it comes to real reforms and democratization of the state, ways are found to circumvent some of the necessary steps in order to fundamentally reform the country, while, he notes, parallel mediation by Brussels officials is often used in resolving political crises, which, he claims, the local classes could and should resolve themselves if they were guided by the public interest.
"All of this just speaks to the inadequacy of the political class," Perović states.
Diplomat and former Minister of Foreign Affairs Miodrag Lekić (Demos), assesses that in “long-standing internationalized circumstances”, individual states, including Montenegro, must not close themselves off, but actively participate in international life. However, he emphasizes that in all this, “a measure must be found”.
"On the one hand, between open and useful international cooperation, and on the other - retaining one's voice, interests, identity, and ultimately - dignity," said Lekić, adding that he believes that Montenegro is "losing that measure in recent history, despite some positive results."
Referendum, government of electoral confidence, Constitutional Court...
One of the most striking examples of foreign intervention in resolving Montenegro's internal issues is the case of the referendum on the state's independence, which was held on 21 May 2006, after the international community gave it the "green light". First, the Venice Commission recommended that, in order to increase the legitimacy of the voting outcome, a qualified majority be set for the decision on independence, while the European Union (EU) mediated in determining the conditions for the referendum.
The “mediator” was the envoy of the European Commissioner for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Javier Solana, Slovak diplomat Miroslav Lajcak, who played one of the key roles in determining the required majority for the referendum to be valid (55 percent of the vote for independence), while his compatriot František Lipka appointed as President of the Republic Referendum Commission on behalf of the EU.
Ten years after the referendum, the international community intervened, not as directly and not to the same extent as in 2006, in resolving the then political crisis, which resulted in the formation of the so-called government of electoral confidence, which included representatives of the then opposition.
In May 2016, the Parliament adopted a proposal on the reconstruction of the Government and a lex specialis legally regulating the formation of a “transitional government of electoral trust”, i.e. a government that would create fair conditions for the elections. This was preceded by difficult negotiations between the then ruling Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS) and the opposition “troika” consisting of Demos, the Social Democratic Party and the Civic Movement URA, which were monitored by the EU and the international community.
The reason for creating conditions for fair elections was the strong suspicions of the opposition and part of the non-governmental sector that the DPS was gaining dominant support in the elections through the misuse of state resources and pressure on citizens. Although EU officials said that Montenegro had to solve the problem of electoral trust on its own, unofficial information at the time said that the then Prime Minister Milo Djukanovic agreed to a government of electoral confidence under pressure "from outside". That model of executive power lasted only a few months...
The EU also influenced the election of the missing judges of the Constitutional Court in early 2023, until which time the institution had been blocked for almost six months, because it did not have a quorum for decision-making. Given that the election of judges requires a two-thirds majority in the Parliament, the government and the opposition were unable to agree on candidates, until sharp warnings from Western partners and the EU, who warned that if the attempt at agreement fails, Montenegro's accession negotiations with the EU could be halted.
Lekić: Exceptions become the rule
The most recent case of foreign mediation is the agreement between Spajić and part of the opposition to submit a request to the Venice Commission for an opinion on the developments regarding the Constitutional Court, which have caused a political crisis. The agreement was "godfathered" by the head of the EU Delegation in Podgorica, Johan Sattler.
On December 17th of last year, the Assembly declared the termination of the judicial function. Dragani Đuranović in the Constitutional Court, with strong opposition from the opposition. These parties prevented the sessions from being held, claiming that the Constitution had been violated because, without the mandatory notification of the Constitutional Court, the termination of Đuranović's office was determined due to the attainment of the conditions for retirement under the Pension and Disability Insurance Act. After concluding an agreement with Spajić, the opposition returned to the parliamentary benches.
DON'T MISS IT
Miodrag Lekić states that postponing and moving problems to arbitration outside the country, "even the incredible one - whether a judge has met the conditions for retirement" - is not a solution, and even less does it create the image of a serious, mature state and its institutions.
He also says that after August 30, 2020, when the three-decade rule of the DPS fell, two governments were formed "not according to the domestic Constitution, but from outside", that one of them was formed by "some fraudster with a fake diplomatic passport", while the government "with the return of the DPS - was formed by other non-institutional persons".
"I don't think that blockages in the functioning of the constitutional-legal-political system should be resolved at international levels. Maybe sometimes, never as a rule, which is gaining momentum here. If that's the case, then Šavnik (where elections last two and a half years, ed.) as a concrete plot, but also as a metaphor for Montenegrin blockages, should be sent somewhere in the world for some analysis. Since that's the case, then probably all of us, together with Šavnik," said Lekić.
Most parliamentary parties did not respond to ''Vijesti''s questions about why major issues in Montenegro are not resolved through institutions, but with the involvement of the international community.
The Socialist People's Party (SNP) assesses that this is a consequence of "long years of political polarization, the legacy of one-party rule, and the lack of a democratic culture of dialogue."
They say that international mediation is sometimes necessary to ensure stability, facilitate compromise and accelerate the decision-making process “essential for Montenegro’s European path.” However, they add that it is preferable for key issues to be resolved within Montenegrin institutions, stating that they welcome “any constructive contribution from international partners that helps the democratic maturation of our country.”
The Messenger of the Force Ilir Chapuni states that the problem is that the institutions of Montenegro are weak or paralyzed to decisively resolve major issues that generate political crises.
When asked whether the actors were thus degrading their own integrity and that of Montenegrin institutions, he replied "mostly not," adding that it mostly depends on who is facilitating the conversation.
"In the specific case of the agreement between PES (Europe Now Movement) and part of the opposition, the facilitator is the EU representative in Montenegro - the mediator that Montenegro on its European path could only wish for. Negotiations are the European way of resolving crises," he said.
Albanian Forum Member of Parliament and Vice President of the Assembly Nikola Camaj, said that the proposal for the latest engagement of the Venice Commission was something that was offered to the opposition from the very beginning, but which they did not accept at the time.
"Everything that followed after that was solely the decision of the opposition, both the boycott and the disruption of the sessions. So these issues should be addressed to them first and foremost," he said.
He said he has nothing against "constructive assistance", especially if it comes from European partners.
Milatović: We have institutions, we don't need embassies
Head of State Jakov Milatović said on Monday, speaking about the agreement between Spajić and part of the opposition, that it was not good practice for the document to be signed "again in a foreign embassy."
"We have our own state institutions, we probably don't need foreign embassies anymore to make certain agreements, no matter how well-intentioned those foreign embassies, including in this case the European one, may be...", he said.
DON'T MISS IT
Bonus video:
