President of the Assembly Andrija Mandic The head of state has been keeping the Law on the Status of the Descendants of the Petrović Njegoš Dynasty "in a drawer" for almost a month and a half, which he returned to the MPs for a re-decision at the beginning of June. Jakov Milatovic, although, according to the Rules of Procedure of Parliament, this regulation should have been placed on the agenda immediately after it was sent back.
Milatović returned the law - whose amendments, among other things, stipulated that the Kruševac Castle in Podgorica would belong to the descendants of the last Montenegrin dynasty - on June 8, claiming that it was contrary to the Constitution.
According to the Rules of Procedure (Article 182), the Speaker of the Assembly places the returned act on the agenda of the first subsequent session. However, Mandić did not do so, and since June 8, according to data from the legislative chamber's website, five sessions have been held or begun.
Parliament and Mandić's cabinet did not respond to "Vijesti" yesterday when asked when the amendments to the Law on the Status of Descendants of the Petrović Njegoš Dynasty would be before MPs again, and why they were not at the first session after Milatović refused to sign them.
An MP from the ruling Europe Now Movement (PES) also did not have an answer to the newspaper's inquiry. Miloš Pižurica, who submitted a proposal for changes to the regulations to the parliamentary procedure this spring.
"I have no information about when the law will be voted on again," he said.
Fear of Belgrade?
In the absence of an official response, one can only speculate about the reasons for Mandić's "hiding" of the regulations on the Petrovićs. And that leads only to one question: did the President of the Parliament and the New Serbian Democracy (NSD) "pull the trigger" in fear of a new "lynching" from Belgrade, or rather from tabloids close to the regime there? Aleksandar Vučić?
Namely, in early June, immediately after the law was amended with the votes of his party, Mandić came under fire because the act still contained the wording that Montenegro was forcibly annexed in 1918 - something the NSD has always denied. The party's MPs (Jovan Vučurović i Dejan Djurovic) proposed at the end of December last year, when the amendments were initially discussed, to completely remove the term "forcible annexation" from the regulations.
However, since in the end this phrase was not deleted, Serbian tabloids attacked Mandić, publishing his photos with the message "shame forever", and stating that for the head of the NSD, Serbia is the occupier of Montenegro, that he "sold his faith for dinner", and "followed in the footsteps" of the former president of Montenegro. Milo Đukanović...
NSD's support for the Petrovic law - along with other moves by the party and its leader in those days, such as his presence at the Prime Minister's reception Milojko Spajić on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the restoration of state independence - did not go without the scolding of those with whom Nova and Mandić had been "colliding" for years. Thus, from the mouth of Serbian President Vučić, one could hear that the only thing he was sure of was that the leader of the Democratic People's Party (DNP) Milan Knezevic and his deputies did not vote for changes to the regulations on the Petrovic family - because Knežević is an "honorable and upright Serb" - until the Belgrade tabloids "caught wind" of Mandić's announcement that after the Petrovic family had "repaid their debt", the property of the Karađorđević dynasty and the Serbian Orthodox Church (SPC) would be returned.
After the campaign that was conducted in those days, the NSD succumbed to pressure and supported the DNP's initiative to withdraw the recognition of Kosovo in Pljevlja. Mandić's party had initially decided to "put support on hold" until it saw the effects of the decision to "recognize" Kosovo in Zeta.
Why is the law controversial to Milatović?
The head of state returned the law to parliament, claiming that the provision that transfers Kruševac Castle, with the (associated) land, to the private property of the prince is controversial. Nikola Petrovic Njegos, great-granddaughter of the king Nicholas - the last ruler of the last Montenegrin dynasty.
Milatović points out that this is a building that has had the status of a protected immovable cultural asset for decades, which is why he believes that transferring it to private ownership is contrary to the Law on the Protection of Cultural Assets and the constitutional obligation of the state to protect cultural heritage.
The President claims that the state has taken a constitutional, legal and balanced approach towards the descendants of the Petrović Njegoš dynasty through a legal solution from 2011, which provided for the construction of a family house in Cetinje and the allocation of an apartment in Podgorica.
According to Milatović, giving the Kruševac castle to private ownership would be an unprecedented case that could open the way for similar demands by descendants of the same or other dynasties towards state property of historical and cultural significance, which, he claims, would be detrimental to the interests of Montenegro.
At the end of April, Miloš Pižurica submitted to the parliamentary procedure a proposal for amendments to the Petrovići law that does not require the removal of the word "forcible" in the wording on the annexation of the state from 1918, which was foreseen in the original version of the proposal submitted by PES last fall, and to which a part of the public reacted sharply. NSD and DNP MPs then requested the deletion of the entire article that mentions "forcible annexation". The parliament did not express a view on this draft law.
The new proposal also removed provisions that stipulated that, if the last Montenegrin ruling house had no descendants in the male line, the tradition should be continued by the oldest female child.
The remaining changes in Pižurica's proposal relate to the work of the "Petrović Njegoš" Foundation being financed from the state budget, by providing 100.000 euros annually.
It was stated that the descendants of the dynasty cannot sell Kruševac Castle, nor alienate the land in any other way. The only “buyer” can be the state, at the price determined on the day of acquisition of the property. The costs of reconstruction and equipping the building are borne by the state, while the funds should be provided from the capital budget.
The proposal also stipulates that institutions located in the castle have the right to continue operating until the Museum of Contemporary Art is built, subject to payment of a rent determined by the competent state administration body for culture.
It is also planned to define the status of real estate given to descendants. The apartment in Podgorica would remain in the ownership of the dynasty, while the land in Cetinje, intended for the construction of a house, would return to state ownership.
See more:
Download the app and follow the news
FOLLOW US ON
