CDT: The speed of adopting laws endangers their quality and democratic standards

The law-making process in Montenegro, at a key stage of European integration, is non-transparent, closed and reduced to urgency as the basic working method, which results in a decline in the quality of laws and inevitably leads to the need for their further amendments, the Center for Democratic Transition (CDT) announced.

In the publication "Analysis of the Work of the Parliament of Montenegro: Laws on the Tape, Limited Control of the Government and Unrealized Electoral Reform", they pointed out the dynamics of the adoption of "European laws" and the fact that legal solutions are often set back after being voted on in the Parliament.

Among them are laws on civil servants and employees and on free access to information.

In the publication, CDT also criticizes the Parliament's failure to adequately respond to the key task - improving electoral legislation.

It is recalled that according to international standards, electoral legislation should not be changed in the year preceding elections, and general local and, potentially, parliamentary elections are expected in June.

This, it is added, means that the reform should be completed by mid-June at the latest.

It is stated that in such circumstances, only a few months remain for the implementation of comprehensive reform, which, as the CDT said, confirms that the months-long delay has only taken the process to the point of no return.

The publication also points out that the Draft Law on the Government, presented in February, does not bring about reform advances in the work of the executive branch, nor does it improve the relationship between the Government and the Parliament.

In the publication, the CDT also questioned appointments in key institutions, recalling that the Agency for Audiovisual Media Services (AMU) was only completed after a year and a half of functioning with an incomplete composition.

The CDT also pointed out that the AMU could once again function with an incomplete composition, given that the mandates of three current members expire in the first half of the year, and that there are delays in organizing new competitions.

Deputy Executive Director of the CDT, Milena Gvozdenović, said that last year the Parliament adopted 201 laws.

Gvozdenović told the MINA agency that this represents a significant increase compared to the previous period.

She emphasized that more than half of the laws (115) were proposed for adoption under an urgent procedure.

"Although this dynamic is largely conditioned by obligations from the European Union (EU) accession process, the European agenda is increasingly being used as a universal justification for accelerated legislation, despite clear warnings from the EU that speed must not be at the expense of quality," said Gvozdenović.

According to her, an illustrative example is the Tax Administration's new system for registering companies, and its non-functioning due to inconsistency of laws.

"Or the Law on Financing Political Entities and Election Campaigns, for which the European Commission, just four months after its adoption, called for additional amendments to increase transparency and strengthen control over the spending of political party funds," Gvodzenović added.

She reminded that, according to the announcement from the Parliament, the Parliament is tasked with adopting more than 120 laws from the European agenda this year, in addition to regular legislative obligations.

"The sheer volume of work should not be a problem with a clear plan and predictable work dynamics. However, such a framework is lacking," said Gvozdenović.

As she stated, MPs do not have systematic information about legislative priorities, deadlines and the content of solutions prepared by the executive branch.

"This effectively means that the parliament is losing control over the process that it should be leading, side by side with the government," Gvozdenović believes.

In such circumstances, she added, the Assembly increasingly functions as a "flow channel" for government proposals.

She stated that an illustrative example is the session at which 25 laws were adopted in just 87 minutes.

"Part of the opposition also contributed to this model, agreeing to limited debate and formal consideration of laws, which maintained the illusion of political inclusiveness, but weakened parliament as a space for real control and discussion," said Gvozdenović.

As she added, the limits of such an approach became apparent in the case of the Law on the National Security Agency and amendments to the Law on Internal Affairs, which, despite serious criticism and warnings about deviations from democratic standards, were nevertheless adopted in March.

"Considering that we subsequently heard the announcement from the largest opposition party that it would no longer support any of the government's proposals, the question remains open as to how the opposition will act in initiatives that directly require its cooperation on the EU path, such as amending the Constitution; or electing judges to the Constitutional Court," Gvozdenović stated.

She assessed that problems are also evident in terms of the control function of the parliament, which depends on the political will of the majority.

This, she added, is shown by the experiences of holding control hearings, the failure of invited institutions to respond, the absence of conclusions or mechanisms for monitoring their implementation in practice.

"Parliament does not respect even the Prime Minister himself, who does not regularly attend Prime Minister's hours, or chooses not to answer MPs' questions orally," said Gvozdenović.

She stated that she is additionally concerned about the attitude towards independent institutions.

"Delays and politically conditioned election processes in bodies such as the Constitutional Court, the AEM Council and the DRI demonstrate the clear intention of the parliament to subordinate these institutions to political will," said Gvozdenović.

As she added, all this is happening at a time when the Parliament should be the key carrier of democratic transformation.

"Ultimately, the dilemma is not whether Montenegro can adopt a large number of laws on its path to the EU - it can. The key question is whether it is truly moving closer to the EU in a way that fundamentally strengthens its legal and democratic system," Gvozdenović believes.

According to her, if the Government and Parliament continue to choose urgency, lack of transparency, and weakening of control, the number of adopted laws may increase, but democratic capacities will weaken.

"This is a paradox that Montenegro should not afford in the announced end of its European path," Gvozdenović concluded.