Regarding the reaction of the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MUP), which shows that it is not giving up on the announced changes to the Law on Public Gatherings and Public Events, but still without concrete arguments, we warn that any change in legal regulations, especially those that reduce the scope of human rights, should be approached only after a thorough analysis of the state and effects of the regulations in force, it was announced today from the Institute of Alternatives (IA).
"Due to the lack of such an analysis, we cannot accept the MUP's interpretation that the right to freedom of movement and freedom of entrepreneurship of citizens who are not participants in public gatherings is threatened. Also, the public is not aware that due to the holding of peaceful public gatherings, citizens were denied emergency medical assistance , although the Ministry of Internal Affairs states that the protection of citizens and the work of the services were threatened. However, given that we fully understand and support the obligation of the emergency services to pass freely in cases of providing assistance and protection to all citizens, the Institute of Alternatives reminds us of Article 16 of the Law on Public Gatherings which obliges the organizer or the leader of the gathering to allow the unhindered passage of police vehicles, ambulances, fire engines and vehicles of other services necessary to maintain order and peace at the public gathering. cases," the IA statement said.
The NGO added that the lack of analysis of concrete data on endangered freedoms that the Ministry of Interior refers to when proposing changes to the Law prevents the public from understanding the perspective of the Ministry of Interior in this case.
"In addition to the lack of analysis, we remind you of the fact that we have repeatedly warned about in previous announcements and letters addressed to the Ministry: the announced changes would be unconstitutional. Namely, the Constitution of Montenegro foresees the possibility of temporarily limiting peaceful public gatherings, exhaustively listing the situations in which this is possible - in order to prevent disorder or the commission of a criminal act, endangering health, morals (Art. 52), foreseeing, therefore, temporary and extreme situations. The prohibition of gatherings on roads would mean an additional restriction for two reasons: because it is related to the location of the event - a ban that the Constitution does not recognize and would be absolute, while the Constitution only recognizes it temporarily. If the MUP, i.e. the Government, had reported the application of the Law on Public Gatherings to the Assembly by the end of March, as the law required (Art. 32), we might have had proof "on paper". Since the public is not informed that this legal obligation has been complied with, the Institute of Alternatives once again calls on the Ministry of Internal Affairs to publish the analyzes based on which it concluded that changes to the Law on Public Gatherings and Public Events are necessary. Otherwise, the public will have the full right to believe that the amendments to the Law will threaten their rights guaranteed by the Constitution," the IA press release reads.
Bonus video:
