The Basic State Prosecutor's Office in Podgorica has not yet made a decision regarding the criminal complaint filed by XX against her ex-husband in October last year on suspicion that he sexually harassed their minor children.
This was told to "Vijesti" yesterday by the Podgorica prosecutor's office.
"The case formed in connection with the aforementioned criminal report is in the investigation phase, meaning that a decision in this case has not yet been made. This is a case that requires particularly careful handling, given the content of the reported allegations and the fact that they relate to minor children. The Basic State Prosecutor's Office is conducting the investigation procedure, the conduct of which has been reported in detail to the Protector of Human Rights," they stated in their response.
The Protector recently published an opinion in which, among other things, it was recommended to the Podgorica Prosecutor's Office "to take all necessary procedural measures and actions without delay" in this case "and decide on the criminal complaint filed by XX against XX on 13. 10. 2025 and which was assigned by the acting state prosecutor on 15. 10. 2025."
XX filed a complaint with the Ombudsman about the work of the State Prosecutor's Office in Podgorica, explaining that a long period of time has passed since the complaint was filed, and that, among other things, she believes that the untimely action violates the legality and effectiveness of the State Prosecutor's Office and that the rights of her children have therefore been violated, bearing in mind that the children are staying with their father throughout the entire procedure in accordance with the court's decision, which may affect their psychophysical development.
In a statement, the Podgorica prosecutor's office told the protector that all actions prescribed by law were taken "in a timely manner, conscientiously and fully in accordance with the methodology for dealing with cases involving a sensitive category of minor victims."
The case, they said, was formed by submitting the case file to the Police Directorate, that the applicant then submitted an amendment, with evidentiary material and certain recordings, that the opinion of the Expert Service of the Supreme State Prosecutor's Office was requested to assess whether children aged five and four could be heard as witnesses, and that they received that finding and opinion, as necessary, in mid-June.
They also add that the findings and opinion of the VDT's Expert Service "ordered the determination of extensive and complex expert assessments that are currently underway."
The Protector, however, assessed that the applicant's complaint was well-founded and that her and her children, who are potentially injured parties, had their right to timely proceedings and decision-making before the competent prosecutor's office violated, "bearing in mind that the ODT in Podgorica has not yet decided on the criminal report even after 10 months from the date of filing it."
The opinion was published on September 2. In the meantime, as they told "Vijesti", the ODT has not decided on the application.
The Ombudsman states that "this (non)action is not in accordance with the instructional deadlines prescribed by the Criminal Procedure Code":
“Where it is prescribed that a decision on a criminal complaint should be made no later than three months from the date of receipt of the case, and exceptionally, in complex cases due to their scope, factual or legal issues, the decision must be made no later than six months.”
They also recalled the provisions of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Family Law of Montenegro, which stipulate that in all actions related to children, the best interests of the child should be of primary importance and in accordance with the principle of urgency.
Regarding the allegations about the need to obtain the findings and opinion of the VSP's Expert Service, the Protector notes that this finding was submitted on 15 June 2026, “after four months”.
"The Protector understands that the preparation of the Findings and Opinions relating to minors included numerous actions that had to be carried out with particular care, taking into account the children, their age and best interests, and that the same could not be completed in a short period of time. The Basic State Prosecutor's Office in Podgorica points out that certain expert opinions are in progress, but did not state when their implementation was ordered," they state.
In their opinion, they also reminded that the competent state prosecutors are obliged to act objectively and with due care in each case, and that in proceedings relating to children, or where children are victims (as stated in the criminal report), they take into account the best interests of the child and respect the principle of timeliness, or urgency. They added, however, that it is very important that there is efficient action by the ODT in Podgorica.
"The Ombudsman emphasizes that he does not have the mandate to influence the decision of any body, including the competent state prosecutor's office, but at the same time points out that it is necessary to make a decision without unnecessary delay, so that the party can possibly take certain actions in this regard," he points out.
When it comes to the length of the proceedings before the competent state authorities, in the specific case of the ODT for more than six months, the Protector recalls the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, which states that the reasonable length of the proceedings must be assessed in light of the circumstances of the case:
“And in relation to the following criteria: the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicant and the conduct of the competent state authorities and the importance of what is important to the applicant in the proceedings”.
He points out that according to the Criminal Procedure Code, the deadline for deciding on a criminal report is six months, in more complex cases.
"Although the aforementioned legal deadlines are instructive, because their expiration does not entail legal consequences in terms of the inability to conduct further investigation, we are of the opinion that the case in question is not complex to the extent that a decision on criminal charges cannot be made for longer than ten months," they state, adding that it also follows from the investigation that the complainant's behavior did not contribute to the duration of the proceedings.
See more:
Download the app and follow the news
FOLLOW US ON
