They won't "clean" the roads until they ask Brussels: Proposed amendments to the law on public gatherings will be withdrawn from the Parliament

The Parliament of Montenegro will not comment further on the proposed amendments to the law on public gatherings, with which the government intended to prevent road blockades in protest, until it receives an opinion on the proposal from the European Commission (EC), Vijesti has learned unofficially.

A source from the ruling Europe Now Movement (PES) said that there will be no decision on the proposed amendments at the parliamentary session scheduled for today, which means that they will be withdrawn from the procedure by force of the Rules of Procedure of the highest legislative chamber (because the regular session is ending), even though the deputies have finished discussing them.

"We will not vote until we receive an official or internal opinion from the EC, with a prior explanation of the norms. It is not our intention to vote for something bad, if there are arguments that confirm it," said the interlocutor of "Vijesti".

The amendments propose prohibiting "seeking justice on the streets", i.e. prohibiting the blockade of highways, expressways, main, regional or local roads and border crossings, if those protesting thereby prevent or hinder traffic and the movement of other citizens. Fines ranging from 500 to 10.000 euros are foreseen for those who do not comply.

The current Law on Public Gatherings and Public Events does not recognize public roads and traffic routes as spaces unsuitable for protests.

The proposal for amendments to that regulation was signed by the following government representatives: Seid Hadzic (who is in the PES MPs' club), Dusko Stjepović (Democrats), Jelena Kljajević (Democratic People's Party), Dejan Djurovic (New Serbian Democracy) and Bogdan Božović (Socialist People's Party).

Part of the Montenegrin public claims that voting for the amendments would represent the introduction of a blanket ban on public gatherings, that is, that it would be an attack on the Constitution.

The decision not to decide on the proposed amendments was preceded, as a source from one of the ruling parties told Vijesti, by a recent "exchange of opinions" between PES and Democrats officials and representatives of the Brussels administration. The ruling majority parties were allegedly advised not to adopt the controversial amendments.

The interlocutor stated that some of the ruling parties were not against such a proposal, stating that the tourist season had actually passed, and that the road blockades would not have a significant impact on it.

In addition to the opposition and part of the non-governmental sector, the proposed amendments to the law were also criticized by international organizations.

United Nations (UN) Resident Coordinator in Montenegro Diego Sorilla, recently delivered to the head of parliament Andrija Mandić (New Serbian Democracy) and all heads of parliamentary caucuses, a letter expressing concern about the proposal.

In the document signed by Sorilja and the UN human rights advisor Annette Lanting, warns of the possibility that the proposed amendments “are not compatible with Article 21 on peaceful assembly guaranteed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)”, which Montenegro signed in 2006.

They stated that the amendments provide for a general ban on public gatherings on main roads, expressways, motorways, regional roads and border crossings, stating that, under international law, restrictions on the use of public spaces can only be imposed when such gatherings impose a “disproportionate burden”, and that in such cases the authorities must provide “detailed justification for any restrictions”.

"Such restrictions must not be general prohibitions, may only be imposed in individual cases, should be the least intrusive and justified in accordance with legitimate reasons permitted by Article 21 of the ICCPR, be necessary in a democratic society, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Second, increasing fines appears unnecessary, disproportionately high and may have a deterrent effect, limiting the exercise of the right to freedom of assembly," the UN assessed.

A similar position was held by the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe (CoE). Majkl O'Flaerti, who on July 24th urged lawmakers not to adopt the amendments, claiming they were not in line with international human rights standards.

He said that freedom of assembly is the foundation of every democratic society and that it allows individuals to publicly express their views, hold authorities accountable, and contribute to political and social dialogue.

"States have a positive obligation to facilitate and protect peaceful assemblies. Any attempt to restrict this right must be treated with the utmost caution and be subject to strict scrutiny, as outlined in the Guidelines on Peaceful Assembly prepared by the Venice Commission and the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR)," O'Flaherty said, calling on parliamentarians to hold public hearings on the proposal and submit the final text to the "Venetians."

The Constitution of Montenegro (Article 52) guarantees freedom of assembly, subject to prior registration of the assembly with the competent authority.

In mid-June, the Police Directorate told Vijesti that citizens were blocking several roads across the country in protest. They specifically referred to the blockades in the town of Kruševo Ždrijelo (Belvedere), on the Cetinje-Podgorica main road, emphasizing that no protests had been reported to them.

They also announced that the protest of citizens in Šavnik, or rather the blockade of the highway to Žabljak, had been reported nine times by then.

The Šavnica opposition, which is part of the state government's constituents, blocked the road every day from late February to mid-June in protest of the re-election. Jugoslav Jakić for the president of that municipality and the fact that the local elections there have not been completed even though they began in October 2022.

The European Convention does not protect intentional obstruction of traffic

The Guide to Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights (drafted by the Council of Europe and the European Court of Human Rights), which guarantees freedom of assembly and association, states that obstructing traffic as part of a demonstration is “conduct which is, in itself, considered peaceful”, but that physical conduct that deliberately obstructs traffic and the normal course of life, “with the aim of seriously disrupting the activities of others”, is not at the core of the freedom protected by that article.

In several judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, that institution ruled in favor of the respondent state that challenged the right to block roads (Barako v. France, Lukas v. United Kingdom, Kudrevičius and Others v. Lithuania).

Milatović's Cabinet: Changes are intended to silence the public

The office of the head of state, Jakov Milatović, announced yesterday that the changes do not protect either traffic or citizens, and that their sole purpose is to discourage any form of civic demonstrations and silence the public.

"That's why it introduces fines that reach 10.000 euros, more than for many criminal offenses," they said in a statement.

Instead of, as they said, protecting freedom of expression and the right to protest, "as the basic pillars of every European democracy," the government is proposing a law "that declares in advance every civil protest a threat."

"Such a solution has no basis in European practice or European values," they said.