Who "stole" the amendment on immunity: Why is there no section in the draft to amend the Constitution on the abolition of protection for members of the Government?

Yesterday, representatives of the ruling and opposition parties were unable - or did not want to - precisely answer the question of why the text of the draft amendments to the Constitution does not include the Government's proposal to lift the immunity of its members for corruption-related crimes, even though this request, as well as the accepted proposals for amendments to the highest legal act in the judiciary and the Central Bank, is important for the country's negotiations with the EU.

Neither side officially wanted to talk about it, while unofficially they shrugged off responsibility for the issue not being on the agenda.

Some parties in the ruling majority unofficially claimed that the executive branch requested that the proposal be withdrawn, or that it not be decided on now, but they emphasized that this is, after all, a topic for the speaker of parliament. Andrija Mandić (New Serbian Democracy).

On the other hand, the opposition suggested to the "Vijesti" journalist that the address for his questions should be the parliamentary majority - given that, as they said, it determines what will be on the agenda - and they also claimed that the amendments to the Constitution regarding the immunity of the President and members of the Government are not important for the EU agenda and that neither the cabinet Milojko Spajić (The Europe Now Movement) did not "force" that issue.

Some government and opposition MPs learned from the newspaper's reporters that the text of the draft amendment they voted for last week does not contain any proposal regarding the immunity of members of the executive branch.

Koprivica: Proposal important for the EU

The Deputy Prime Minister confirmed that this issue is important for Montenegro's negotiations with the EU. Momo Koprivica (Democrats), who, on behalf of the National Anti-Corruption Council, proposed the aforementioned amendments to the Constitution to Spajić's cabinet.

Koprivica told the editorial staff that this is one of the recommendations of the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO), and that it is therefore of importance for EU integration, because, as he explained, the action plan for the implementation of these recommendations is an integral part of Chapter 23 (judiciary and fundamental rights) in negotiations with Brussels.

"On this occasion, I appeal that the Parliament should also take this into account, so as not to create the impression that only the norms on the judiciary and the Central Bank are important for EU membership, even though these norms are more directly set as a prerequisite (for membership)," he emphasized.

In his response to "Vijesti", Koprivica did not state whether he knew the reason why the immunity proposal was "lost", but he reminded that the request had been "passed" by the Constitutional Committee, and appealed for the procedure in the highest legislative chamber to continue as soon as possible.

"The proposal was unanimously supported by the Government (after which it was sent to the Parliament, prim. aut), and therefore there is no dilemma regarding the full support of the parliamentary majority. The Parliament has shown the capacity to achieve the general interest, and I have no doubt that in the continuation of its very demanding and extensive work, this proposal, which is of importance for the rule of law and EU integration, will very soon be included," he stated.

The Deputy Prime Minister for the Political System, Judiciary and Anti-Corruption announced that the lifting of immunity for the President and members of the Government for corruption crimes is an anti-corruption measure of the highest order. According to him, this change to the Constitution means that the one who leads the state must be the first to answer, and that the performance of the highest public functions implies full responsibility for every official decision made, without any exception. This, he adds, is the capital value of this change.

"We firmly stand behind the proposal, starting from the position that public office must not be a shelter from the application of the law. That would be a capital anti-corruption norm for the future. Preventing corruption requires precisely such strong norms... The best form of fighting corruption is a system that creates strong incentives to strictly respect the law. Such a system, free from corruption, creates security and predictability, and that would be the most important comparative advantage of Montenegro in the international economic arena," stated Koprivica.

Bajramspahić: The image of anti-corruption

Civic activist Dina Bajramspahić She assessed that, whether it was an accidental or intentional "lost" of the amendment, the aforementioned situation is a reflection of the anti-corruption policy of the executive branch and the ruling majority.

The question, she says, must be asked what is controversial about lifting the immunity of members of the Government for criminal acts against official duty.

"Montenegro is seriously stagnating when it comes to anti-corruption efforts, and this is confirmed by all relevant international reports - from Transparency International to Freedom House. The amendment that was 'lost' could have helped improve the annual grades, because it would have sent a message that the ministers in the government are not afraid of being arrested for corruption. It seems that, however, this is not the case, and that is why they will not cut the branch they are sitting on," Bajramspahić told the editorial office.

This situation, according to her, is also a typical illustration of how the Government perceives reforms - she explains that only what the EU says will be implemented, otherwise the entire negotiations will be blocked. Everything else, she claims, is ignored, even if it is mandatory as a measure under Chapter 23.

"A government that believes that corruption is unacceptable would adopt this policy regardless of whether there is sufficient external pressure on this specific issue. Reforms in Montenegro have been reduced to fulfilling basic administrative obligations, such as filling high-ranking positions, because everything else is obviously too demanding," the interviewee emphasizes.

Arrows towards the prosecution

There is no evidence that the immunity amendment was intentionally "lost", but last week's messages from parliament, from the session at which the draft text for changes to the Constitution was adopted, raise the question of whether it is in anyone's interest to deprive members of the executive branch of their "shield" against corruption.

Although he did not directly address the issue of immunity, the MP and leader of the until recently ruling Democratic People's Party (DNP) Milan Knezevic He told the deputies that by voting to begin the procedures for amending the highest legal act, they created "two pharaohs" - the chief special prosecutor Vladimir Novović and the Supreme State Prosecutor Milorad Marković.

"You have created a fourth branch of government, where two people will decide the vote and threaten 'you're in the drawers, you're on Skye', and then we will all live in an atmosphere of fear," he said, adding that some government officials are 'in the drawer' for corrupt dealings, but that Novović does not want to prosecute them.

Member of Parliament and President of the Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS) Danijel Zivkovic, said that "the most dangerous thing is when you allow the monopoly of any government with the Constitution." He stated that Knežević's claims that there are cases "in the drawer" that are ready to be executed are correct, and that these involve several ministers.

Last Thursday (July 9), the Parliament adopted with 70 votes "in favor" the text of the draft amendments to the Constitution, which relate to strengthening the independence of the judiciary (the composition of the Prosecutorial and Judicial Councils), as well as the issue of the independence of the Central Bank. The amendments were opposed by DNP deputies.

The procedure for amending the highest legal act was initiated after an agreement between the government and the opposition, which was "godfathered" by the EU Delegation to Montenegro. The two sides agreed to implement all procedures related to amending the Constitution by September 4th at the latest.

After the adoption of the draft amendments, a public debate will follow, which will last at least a month. After the public debate is concluded, the Constitutional Committee of the Assembly will determine the draft amendments, on which the Parliament will vote once again (it previously voted to initiate the process of amending the Constitution and the draft amendments), and for the adoption of the changes, as in previous rounds of decision-making, a two-thirds majority - at least 54 votes - will be required.

Who is protected by immunity?

According to the Constitution (Article 86), immunity, in addition to MPs and the President and members of the Government, is enjoyed by the Head of State, the President of the Supreme Court, the President and judges of the Constitutional Court, and the Supreme State Prosecutor.

The Parliament decides on immunity rights, which means that without its approval, criminal proceedings cannot be initiated against the aforementioned officials, nor can they be ordered to be detained - unless they are caught committing a criminal offense for which a penalty of more than five years in prison is prescribed.