The Police Administration claims that they have no reason to ban the protests that blocked the key roads to the coast, while the lawyer Veselin Radulović says that this is not true and that the state can always ban gatherings, if the rights of others are threatened in any way.
"I support the protests, but I think it would be more appropriate to express that protest exactly at the address they consider responsible, which is usually the Government," said the lawyer.
The tourist pre-season was marked by protests by the workers of Košuta from Cetinje - who expressed their dissatisfaction with unpaid wages by closing the road from Podgorica to Cetinje, which further leads to the central part of the coast, as well as the Bay of Kotor. Their protests are still going on.
Then, in the peak of the season, the people of Crmnica closed the second most important road, towards the southernmost Montenegrin municipalities - preventing tourists and citizens from passing through the "Sozina" tunnel.
Thus, this year's tourist season is marked by hours-long, endless lines of cars and the indignation of citizens, who previously told "Vijesta" that it is unacceptable for key roads to the coast to be blocked in the midst of the tourist season, especially on weekends when the frequency of already dense traffic is increased.
Answering questions from the editorial office, the Police Administration said that the Law on Public Gatherings and Public Events does not recognize public roads and thoroughfares as areas unsuitable for protests.
"The Law on Public Gatherings and Public Events defines a public gathering as any peaceful gathering of more than 20 people in an open space for the purpose of expressing political, social and other beliefs and goals, protests, interests and differences. Article 6 of the aforementioned Law does not mention public roads and thoroughfares as areas unsuitable for public gatherings," said the UP.
The law, however, in the same article provides that gatherings can be organized in areas "where it does not endanger human rights and freedoms and special minority rights and freedoms of other persons, personal health and safety of persons and property".
UP: We are looking for compromises with the organizers
The UP also says that "public gatherings that were organized on public roads in the previous period, and which as such provoked the displeasure of road users and public interest, were reported to the competent authority - the Police Directorate".
"They were organized and carried out in accordance with the provisions of the above-mentioned law and as such were legal, and in the past period there were no undeclared roadblocks", they claim.
They also explain that the Constitution of Montenegro "guarantees the freedom of peaceful assembly, without authorization, with prior notification to the competent authority".
"Public gatherings of citizens and public events, as well as the manner of registering and organizing them, are more precisely regulated by the Law on Public Gatherings and Public Events. "According to the public gatherings that were organized in the previous period on public roads and their organizers, the Police Directorate had a relationship that was exclusively based on the provisions of the Constitution of Montenegro and the law," they claim.
The Police Directorate, on the other hand, claims that they are not competent to judge whether those protesting threaten the human rights and freedoms of other citizens.
"It is the duty of the Police Administration to, in accordance with the law, protect and guarantee the rights and freedoms of all citizens, established by the Constitution and international conventions."
They also claim that they "use every opportunity to find compromise solutions through consultations with the organizer, which is one of the possibilities provided by law."
"...In terms of the venue and the duration of the public gathering on roads, on the one hand, it enables the participants of the public gathering to express a peaceful protest and draw the public's attention to the problem that burdens them, and on the other hand, it enables the participants in the traffic who are not participants of the public gathering the safest and fastest possible passage", they pointed out.
The Law on Public Roads, among other things, states that "it is prohibited to temporarily or permanently occupy a public road or its part or to carry out any works on the road that are not related to the maintenance or reconstruction of the road, and that - other actions that damage or would could damage the road, reduces visibility, hinders the flow of traffic, i.e. endangers the safe flow of traffic on the road".
Radulović: They only focus their anger on themselves
Lawyer Veselin Radulović told "Vijesta" that he supports all citizens who fight for their rights, but he believes that "it would be more appropriate to express this protest exactly at the address they consider responsible, which is usually the Government".
He points out that "all rights and freedoms, whether of an individual or a group, end where the rights of others begin".
"You cannot exercise your rights at the expense of endangering the rights of other persons. I completely understand the people in all these cases and their motivation, and it is crucial to say that all of them are threatened in some way by the Government and the authorities. I don't think it's a good way to protest and try to exercise rights, because essentially they redirect the anger and nervousness of other citizens not to the cause of the problem, but to themselves," explains the lawyer.
Radulović also emphasizes that this type of protest threatens the rights of citizens and has a counter-effect.
"I have always been a supporter that all protests should be supported, especially when they are justified, which in all these cases they are, I think it would be more appropriate for them to express their protest exactly at the address they consider responsible, and most often it is the Government. Why not make a protest in front of the Government, why not create problems and warn those who are the cause of the problem, and not direct it towards those who have nothing to do with it and who did not participate in any way in causing the problem", he assessed.
Radulović points out that "the state is always able to ban such issues and enable normal traffic or any segment of life."
"This is what the state should do when the rights of other persons are threatened in any way. Most often, it is about endangering the right to freedom of movement, to a considerable extent this is done and causes some consequences that are even more serious, so traffic is endangered, crowds are created, we see that Montenegro is currently in the midst of the tourist season, the frequency of traffic is normally increased, so that traffic and other people's rights are further threatened with these blockades. The state can react to that and ban these protests, but it does not consciously do so for the very reason that with these protests, these people who are rightfully seeking the fulfillment and realization of some of their rights draw attention to themselves and direct the nervousness and anger of other citizens towards them. themselves, and the Government is the one that is actually responsible and behaves as if it is not interested in the problem it caused, nor the problem that is created additionally with this type of expression", he concluded.
Bonus video:
