Some in the opposition claim that they do not expect the former Democratic Front (DF) to prevent the implementation of potential recommendations from the Venice Commission, and that they cannot do so if the Council of Europe body assesses that the Constitution was violated when determining the termination of a judge's office. Dragani Đuranović in the Constitutional Court.
A source for "Vijesti" from one of the opposition parties claims that the guarantee for this - which, after the recent signing of an agreement between some of those parties and the Prime Minister Milojko Spajić, "there is a majority in the Constitutional Committee", which, together with the opposition, consists of Spajić's Europe Now Movement (PES) and the ruling Bosniak Party (BS). This majority, the interlocutor explained, could implement some possible recommendations of the "Venetians", which implies that this job would not depend on the head of parliament and one of the leaders of the former DF, Andrije Mandić.
"Anyone who cares about integration processes can hardly ignore the opinion of the Venice Commission," said the source.
Seven days ago, Spajić, with the mediation of the Delegation of the European Union (EU) in Podgorica, signed an agreement with the leaders of the Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS), the Social Democrats (SD) and the Croatian Civic Initiative (HGI), Danijel Živković, Damir Šehović i Adrian VuksanovićAccording to that document, the text of the request to the "Venetians" should be prepared by one representative from each side, no later than seven days after the initialing of the agreement. Which means - by the end of the day.
The parties of the former DF, New Serbian Democracy and the Democratic People's Party, stated that the document was non-binding for them, and according to unofficial information from "Vijesti", they had no objections to the choice of the Minister of Justice. Bojan Božović (PES) to work on behalf of the authorities on the text of the request for the Venice Commission.
The newspaper's interlocutor from the ruling majority said that in their joint Viber group, it was suggested that Božović write the text of the request and that if anyone had any objections or other suggestions, they should make them known.
"No one has come forward about this," the source claims.
On behalf of the opposition, a proposal for a request for the "Venetians" is being prepared by a lawyer Miloš Vukčević.
After he and Božović reach an agreement, Spajić should submit the agreed request to the Venice Commission.
According to information from ''Vijesti'', there was communication between Božović and Vukčević yesterday. The source said that it will continue today and that he expects their work to be completed during the day.
As previously stated to "Vijesti" by the parliamentary majority, two questions could be addressed to the Council of Europe body. The first should relate to the procedure that preceded the termination of Dragana Đuranović's judicial function in the Constitutional Court, i.e. whether this was done in accordance with the Constitution, and the second - whether Constitutional Court judges should retire in accordance with the Law on Pension and Disability Insurance (PIO) or the Labor Law.
On December 17th of last year, the Constitutional Committee concluded that Đuranović had met the conditions for retirement under the Pension and Disability Insurance Act, on the basis of which the Parliament declared her termination of office on the same day, with strong opposition from the opposition. These parties prevented parliamentary sessions from being held, claiming that the Constitution had been violated because Đuranović's judicial office had been declared terminated without the mandatory notification of the Constitutional Court.
SPAJIĆ: YOU CAN TALK ABOUT TOUCHY ISSUES
After the agreement with Spajić, the opposition returned to parliament. The document, which has two articles, also states that the signatories agreed to take all necessary steps towards the full implementation of the opinion of the Venice Commission, and that until it is received, the further procedure for the election of a judge of the Constitutional Court according to the competition announced by the Constitutional Committee will be suspended.
The second article states that the parties commit to normalizing the political situation and restoring the functionality of the Parliament, to supporting EU reforms and legislative initiatives prepared in consultation with EU institutions, with the aim of completing EU accession negotiations by the end of 2026, and to continuing the work of the parliamentary committee on electoral reform.
Although the DPS claims that it was agreed not to raise “issues that polarize the Montenegrin public, without a previously established general political consensus in the country”, there is no mention of this in the agreement. The DPS has repeatedly insisted that the government initial an agreement with the opposition that would introduce a moratorium on amendments to the Constitution and the Law on Montenegrin Citizenship, because it believes that this is not discussed precisely enough in the government’s “Barometer 26” platform, which it offered for signature.
The day after the agreement was signed, the New Serbian Democracy (NSD) said that this was a "party agreement between PES, DPS and others from the opposition", and not an agreement between the government and the opposition. NSD MP Jovan Vučurović, he announced that this is confirmed by the signatures on the document, as well as the composition of those who negotiated, and where, apart from PES, there are no other constituents of the government.
PES responded that the agreement between the government and the opposition, which is presented as an agreement between PES and DPS, is actually "shameless manipulation ahead of the elections in Nikšić and Herceg Novi."
At a press conference yesterday, Spajić, answering the question of whether they had reached an agreement with the opposition that identity issues would not be raised, said that the opposition had verbally agreed to join "Barometer 26".
"The majority has already unanimously voted for 'Barometer 26', we have been inviting them to join for months. We are really happy that they accepted it, they have some formulation that they probably have to sell to their voters. The most important thing is that the country has united around 'Barometer 26'," he said, adding that "tough issues" can be discussed because Montenegro is a democratic state.
Urgent opinion can arrive in a month
An interlocutor of "Vijesti", familiar with the work of the Venice Commission, explained that, if a request for an urgent opinion is submitted to it, it will arrive in a month or earlier (in this case - by the end of April at the latest), and that if a request for a "regular" opinion is submitted, it will have to wait until the plenary session of the "Venetians", which should be held in mid- or late June.
The Venice Commission was requested to provide an urgent opinion in November 2022, in the event of amendments to the Law on the President of Montenegro. The body issued its opinion within a month, but this finding was not accepted by part of the current parliamentary majority. The Commission had recommended not to adopt the amendments to the Law on the President, as they would essentially constitute an amendment to the Constitution, and with a smaller parliamentary majority than required.
This request was submitted to the "Venetians" by the then head of state, Milo Đukanović, because the amendments to the law envisaged the transfer of part of the authority for selecting the prime minister-designate from the president to the parliament.
The amendments were annulled by the Constitutional Court in June 2023, after being "unblocked" by the election of the missing number of judges in February of the same year.
Bonus video:
