The Venice Commission (VC) assessed that Montenegro had largely taken into account its earlier recommendations regarding the Draft Law on the Government, but warned that the document was still not fully aligned with the Constitution, especially when it comes to the technical mandate of the executive branch, that it did not explicitly prescribe its accountability to the Parliament, and that it did not provide for parliamentary oversight of the Code of Ethics.
This is stated in the new opinion of the Venice Commission on the Draft Law on the Government, which has been in the parliamentary procedure since February. The parliament did not respond to the question of "Vijesti" when the proposal will be on the agenda.
The Venice Commission has already issued two opinions on versions of the draft law on the Government - in 2023 and 2025.
The draft law, unlike the January 2025 draft, does not limit the number of members of the Government, but only the number of ministers without portfolio. The 2025 draft states that the executive branch can have a maximum of 18 ministers for administrative areas, while the new document deletes that provision, stating only that the Government must have ministers for seven administrative areas: justice, defense, internal affairs, finance, foreign affairs, health, and public administration. These seven areas cannot be merged with others.
Despite the fact that part of the public has appealed that the powers of the executive branch, which has lost the confidence of the Parliament and is in a so-called technical mandate, must be limited by law, the Draft Law does not mention this. The novelty in the Draft Law is that at least 40 percent of the members of the executive branch should be from the underrepresented gender.
Full harmonization of laws with the Constitution, namely with Articles 103 and 110, which relate to the election of the Government and the termination of its mandate, should be ensured.
By letter dated May 6, the Minister of Public Administration Marash Dukaj He requested a subsequent opinion from the Supreme Court on the Bill, and on May 22, the rapporteurs of the "Venetians" held an online meeting with him, as well as with representatives of the Prime Minister's office and Montenegrin MPs.
"Despite attempts, it was not possible to organize meetings with representatives of civil society and international partners," the Commission stated.
The opinion, they add, was based on the rapporteurs' comments and the results of meetings held and after an exchange of views with representatives of the Ministry of Public Administration of Montenegro, and was adopted at the 147th plenary session of the Venice Commission held on June 12 and 13.
In this subsequent opinion, the Commission assessed the extent to which the Draft Law follows the recommendations contained in its two previous opinions on this text.
The rules on forming a government must be included in the Constitution.
The VK welcomes the fact that “key recommendations relating to the temporary impediment of the Prime Minister to perform his function have been fulfilled”, as well as those concerning gender equality and minority representation, the number of ministries and the designation of seven mandatory ministries, and rules on quorum and decision-making.
The Commission also notes the partial implementation of its key recommendation relating to the principle of legality, but draws the attention of the Montenegrin authorities in particular to the recommendation that has not been fully implemented, namely to ensure full harmonisation of the law with the Constitution, namely with Articles 103 and 110, which relate to the election of the Government and the termination of its mandate.
According to Article 110, the executive branch whose mandate has expired continues its work until the election of a new Government.
The Venice Commission points out that, as the composition and functioning of the Government, as well as its relations with other state bodies, are already regulated by the Constitution, the authorities must ensure that the law is in line with the highest legal act.
"The law may further elaborate constitutional principles and prescribe more detailed solutions, but it must not be in conflict with constitutional norms," they said.
The Commission reiterates that changes to the rules on the formation of the Government or the introduction of new mechanisms that affect the constitutional system of checks and balances should not be regulated by an ordinary law adopted by a simple majority, but by constitutional amendments, which require a two-thirds majority of all deputies.
In its 2025 opinion, the Commission positively assessed the deletion of several provisions that regulated in detail issues that were not provided for in the Constitution, such as the composition of the Government, deadlines for appointing the prime minister, and the powers of the technical government.
The Commission also states that the recommendation to specify in Article 3 of the law that the actions of the Government are subject to parliamentary accountability was not adopted.
Article 3 of the Proposal stipulates that the Government shall act independently within its competences, “but does not contain a provision on its accountability to the Parliament”.
"Although the Proposal provides for the accountability of individual members of the Government to the parliament - the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Ministers and ministers - there is no general provision that would regulate the accountability of the Government as a collective body," the opinion states.
The Commission points out that the Assembly's constitutional authority to elect and dismiss the Government clearly implies its accountability to the Parliament, therefore it believes that in order to avoid any ambiguities, this should be explicitly stated in the law.
The opinion welcomes the clarification from Article 20 of the Proposal, according to which the President and members of the Government take an oath before the deputies immediately after the election.
What if someone fails the integrity test?
The VK also points to the unfulfilled recommendation to ensure the right of the Parliament to oversee the Government's Code of Ethics, "so that there would be a certain measure of legislative oversight over this sensitive issue."
"During discussions with government representatives, the Commission delegation was informed that the Code of Ethics will be adopted as a secondary legislation of the Government and published in the Official Gazette. The Commission understands that there are practical difficulties in subjecting an act adopted by the Government to parliamentary scrutiny, but recalls that the purpose of such scrutiny is to increase the transparency of the work of the executive branch," they stated.
The VK also notes that the law does not contain provisions on the consequences of a negative integrity check result on the formation of the Government and the functioning of institutions.
"The interlocutors emphasized that such restrictions cannot be prescribed by law because there is no basis for them in the Constitution, and that preparations for constitutional reform in that area are underway," the opinion states.
The Commission notes these explanations and acknowledges that without appropriate constitutional provisions it is difficult to legally regulate the consequences of a negative integrity check. It welcomes the announced constitutional reform and recalls that the issue of integrity checks is also being addressed by the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO).
Therefore, the Commission recommends that, after implementing the appropriate constitutional reform, the steps to be taken in the event of negative integrity check results be specified in law as soon as possible.
The VK also requests additional clarification of the status of the Deputy Prime Minister, as Article 11, paragraph 3 of the Bill stipulates that "the Deputy Prime Minister may be a minister". It recalls that the original draft stipulated that "as a rule" the Deputy Prime Minister is also a minister, and that it warned back in 2023 that such a formulation could raise doubts about the possibility of a Deputy Prime Minister without a ministerial function.
In the 2025 version, the text was amended and it was specified that the Deputy Prime Minister does not have to be a minister, which the Commission welcomed at the time.
"However, the new formulation 'may be a minister' reopens questions about whether it is possible to have a vice-president without a ministerial function and whether a vice-president can simultaneously be a minister without a portfolio. During the consultations, the Montenegrin authorities stated that such a solution has proven effective in practice. The Commission takes note of this explanation, but considers that further clarification is needed," the opinion states, assessing that this recommendation has been partially implemented.
Montenegro is among the few countries in the region that does not have a law on government. A working group for the preparation of this regulation was formed in the Ministry of Public Administration back in June 2022. The necessity of enacting the law was most talked about when the country was led by the Government Dritan Abazović (Civil Movement URA). After being overthrown in parliament (August 2022), she governed the country for a year and two months at full capacity (until the end of October 2023).
See more:
Download the app and follow the news
FOLLOW US ON
