The Center for Democratic Transition (CDT) announced that it expresses serious concern over the dramatic decline in transparency in the work of the Prosecutorial Council (PC), which, they said, culminated in the completely meaningless anonymization of the minutes of this body's sessions.
According to them, the Law on the State Prosecutor's Office stipulates that the work of the Prosecutorial Council is public, and the Rules of Procedure stipulate that its sessions are open to the public, except in cases prescribed by law and the Rules of Procedure.
However, as stated by the CDT, amendments to the Rules of Procedure from November last year introduced a new provision that stipulates that the minutes be published on the Prosecutorial Council's website and anonymized in accordance with the act that anonymizes decisions of the Prosecutorial Council.
"In December 2025, a new Rulebook on Anonymization was adopted. The result of the implementation of these changes can be seen today on the Prosecutorial Council's website - in the minutes of the two December sessions, in which even the names of the president and members of the Council, the designations of acts, as well as all personal data, have been anonymized, regardless of whether they are officials performing public office. Thus, today we can read that a decision was made to 'terminate the function of prosecutor XY', that 'the compensation of prosecutor XX is determined', or that the case marked 'XZ' was considered, but we cannot find out who attended the session, who proposed the decision, who voted, whether there were opposing opinions or discussions, or even to whom and on what basis compensation from public funds is awarded," the CDT statement signed by program director Milica Kovačević emphasizes.
The CDT adds that this practice is contrary to elementary logic and the basic principles of transparency, especially considering that the sessions are formally public.
"In practice, this means that only those who physically attend the session can find out what is happening there. In the age of digital technology, when it is standard for sessions of public bodies to be broadcast or at least documented in detail, citizens, media and civil society organizations cannot find out from their homes, offices and editorial offices what one of the key bodies of the judicial system is doing," the statement reads.
They also said that this represents a serious step backwards compared to the practice of the previous convocation of the Prosecutorial Council, when it was chaired by two acting Supreme State Prosecutors.
"The minutes from that period contained a detailed flow of the discussion, proposals, assessments, statements, initiatives and objections of individual members. The public could follow how decisions were formed, who stood behind which positions and what the professional debate within the Council looked like. The media regularly and extensively reported on the sessions, and the moves of the TS were the subject of public analysis and comment. Even before the reforms in the prosecutorial organization that were implemented a few years ago, the minutes were more substantial and informative than they are today. Today we are witnessing complete formalism without content - minutes that are reduced to a technical record of decisions, without context, without discussion and without responsibility," it states.
The CDT added that the tendency towards reduced transparency has been visible in the past two years, but the latest changes represent a qualitatively new level of closure - now the public is practically reduced to a mere formality, without any real insight into the work and decision-making of this body.
"For comparison, the minutes of the Judicial Council sessions, unlike the Prosecutorial Council, are not anonymized in this way. Although their content could be further improved, compared to the new TS practice, they represent an example of a higher level of transparency and accountability. Normal institutional development, after the exceptionally high-quality minutes from the previous TS mandate, would imply further progress - broadcasting sessions, publishing audio or video recordings, using modern technology to strengthen public trust. Instead, we are witnessing confinement in offices and minutes full of XY, XX and XZ markings," the CDT statement reads.
They also said that we would like to remind you that in neighboring Serbia, which is significantly behind Montenegro in the European integration process, the interested public can follow the sessions of the Prosecutorial Council via online broadcast.
"Instead of being an example of good practice, Montenegro is recording a decline in transparency compared to the standards that were previously established. The latest report by the European Commission assessed that 'public communication and transparency of both councils are ensured and continue to be improved', and that sessions are public, attended by the media and civil society organizations, and that decisions, minutes and statements are regularly published. However, that report was published before the adoption of the latest amendments to the Rules of Procedure and the Rulebook on Anonymization," it states.
The CDT believes that the European Commission should be informed of this regression, because the formal publication of the minutes does not mean substantial transparency.
"Releasing a document in which key data on actors, discussion and responsibility have been deleted does not contribute to strengthening public trust, but further undermines it. We call on the Prosecutorial Council to urgently review the new practice of anonymization and return the standards of transparency to the level that has already been achieved, as the current practice is a clear step backwards compared to previously achieved standards of transparency," the statement concludes.
Bonus video:
