Although Prime Minister Milojko Spajić (Europe Now Movement) was supposed to submit a request to the Venice Commission for an opinion on developments regarding the Constitutional Court by Sunday, he has not yet done so because the government and the opposition cannot agree on the text of the request, that is, on how many questions should be sent and what they should relate to.
The text of the request is being written on behalf of the government by Justice Minister Bojan Božović (Europe Now Movement), while the opposition has entrusted the task to lawyer Miloš Vukčević.
According to unofficial information from "Vijesti", the two continued talks last night on harmonizing the proposals, but they did not reach an agreement. A source from the ruling majority said that they were "stuck" last night over the number of questions, and that the opposition believes it would be best to send one, common one to the Venetians.
"And we wouldn't limit either them or us. But we're close to finding each other...", the interlocutor claims.
The same source announced earlier yesterday, before the continuation of the talks between Božović and Vukčević, that the opposition was insisting that they send for (one) question, but stated that he thought that the realization of that idea was questionable.
"It would be fair for everyone to come with as many questions as they think they need," he said, adding that the opposition's question refers to an article of the Constitution (154, paragraph 3) that concerns the occurrence of reasons for the termination of a judge's office in the Constitutional Court, and that the government wants to ask more questions.
"What if there is no session of the Constitutional Court at all (at which the occurrence of the reasons for termination of office or dismissal is determined), does it have to be held, etc. However, they (the opposition) claim that our questions are suggestive, and we think that theirs is so...", said the interlocutor, adding that Montenegro would not be the first country to send multiple questions to the Venetians in one request.
On the other hand, a source for "Vijesti" from the opposition states that they would agree to a compromise if both sides sent for the question, and everything else that interests the government would be stated in the explanation of the request.
"Because the Venice Commission will not deal with the issue of whether Constitutional Court judges retire under the Labor Law or the PIO (Pension and Disability Insurance) Law," he said.
If Božović and Vukčević agree, the agreed request should be sent to the Venice Commission by Spajić.
On the evening of March 15, with the mediation of the Delegation of the European Union (EU) in Podgorica, he signed an agreement with the leaders of the Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS), the Social Democrats (SD) and the Croatian Civic Initiative (HGI), Danijela Živković, Damir Šehović and Adrijan Vuksanović, on resolving the political crisis. It was triggered by the decision of the parliament in mid-December last year to declare Dragana Đuranović's judicial function in that judicial institution, without the mandatory notification of the Constitutional Court.
The request should have been sent by Sunday.
According to the agreement, the text of the request was to be sent to the Venetians no later than seven days after the initialing of the document, which means by Sunday.
Vukčević said yesterday that the text has not yet been agreed upon and that there were disagreements with Božović about the number of questions.
"I thought that one question should be asked: whether the actions of the Constitutional Committee and the conclusion of that committee on the termination of Đuranović's office are formally unconstitutional. On the other hand, the minister thought that more questions should be asked," Vukčević told RTCG, adding that he expected them to come forward with one specific question, which would be accompanied by an explanation from both sides.
Božović stated on the show "Nedjelja u retrovizoru" on Television "Vijesti" the day before yesterday that the government and the opposition would write questions "in their own way", and with "certain attachments" send them to the Venice Commission.
"Colleagues from the opposition are questioning the formal and legal deficiency of not holding a session of the Constitutional Court, on the basis of which, according to their interpretation, the Constitutional Committee should have been informed. On the other hand, we see this as an opportunity and a letter to the Venice Commission to raise the issue of a substantive and legal nature, as well as other matters relating to that famous Article 154 of the Constitution of Montenegro...", Božović assessed, stating that it is difficult to expect that a full "word-for-word agreement on one issue" will be reached.
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 resignation 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 resignation was declared without the mandatory notification of the Constitutional Court.
"Vijesti" asked the EU Delegation whether they believe that one question or more should be sent to the Venetians, or whether everyone should have their own questions, and whether the Delegation will mediate in drafting the request.
Sekulović: Don't suggest answers to questions
Lawyer and former Minister of Internal Affairs Sergej Sekulović assessed that sending questions that suggest the position of the submitter and the answer should be avoided, especially since, he says, the parties have diametrically opposed positions.
"If this is so, then we can proceed with separate questions about the same essence, which would be accompanied by a separate explanation of the arguments. Something similar to a lawsuit and a response to the lawsuit, if that kind of analogy can be used. I believe that this would be helpful to the Venice Commission itself. It is important that it be within the framework of one document and that whatever the opinion is, it is accepted," Sekulović told "Vijesti".
When asked whether there is a danger that if there are two questions (the authorities and the opposition), everyone will respect their opinion on the issue, the interlocutor replied that he does not think that could happen because, according to him, the Venice Commission will answer the essentially one question of whether the Constitution has been violated or not.
"We need to wait for their response, to see how clear and precise it will be. It would certainly be good if they approached this issue comprehensively in their opinion and made recommendations for future situations," he said.
One of the interlocutors of ''Vijesti'' from the ruling majority said that the Venice Commission cannot be sent questions that will be opposed, stating that they must concern the same matter. According to him, the Venetians will listen to the opinions of both the government and the opposition and give an answer "that will satisfy both the government and the opposition".
After the agreement with Spajić, the opposition returned to parliament. The document they signed with him, which has two members, 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.
DON'T MISS IT
Bonus video:
