After being the Vice-Rector of the University of Montenegro Veselin Mlcanovic announced that he would run for the top position of that institution, the current rector Vladimir Bozovic made a decision to entrust the tasks in the field of the teaching process, which Mićanović has been dealing with so far, to the head of the Center for Quality Improvement Svetlana Perovic, was confirmed by "News" from several sources.
The University of Montenegro officially announced to "Vijesti" that it is true that Božović made a decision authorizing Perović, director of the Center for Quality Improvement, to coordinate, monitor and implement certain activities in the field of preparing the accreditation of study programs, enrollment policy for the 2026/2027 academic year, and hiring external staff for the next academic year.
As they claim, the decision was made "in order to ensure continuity, efficiency and timely execution of tasks in this area."
Professor Perović, according to the decision, which the editorial team has access to, will take over the preparation and coordination of documentation for the consideration and adoption of proposals for the enrollment of students in undergraduate and master's studies for 2026/2027, and will also deal with the issue of the required number of associates, internal and external advertisements, as well as other tasks in the field of teaching and the teaching process.
The University of Montenegro states that Perović serves as the director of the Center for Quality Improvement, "which is a position that formally encompasses the area of activities defined by the decision in question."
"The above does not imply a lack of cooperation between Professor Perović and services and individuals within the University of Montenegro, including cooperation with Vice-Rector Mićanović," the University of Montenegro responded.
Mićanović, however, believes that the decision came after he announced his intention to participate in a potential competition to select a new rector.
Responding to questions from "Vijesti", he confirmed that "it is true that in his absence the rector made or ordered his associates to write a decision (number 01-3280 of 12.05.2026) transferring the powers of the vice-rector for teaching to a colleague from the Quality Center".
He assessed that such a "reaction occurred to the expressed position that I had decided to participate in a potential competition for the election of a new rector."
"I am more than certain that the reasons for such a decision are subjective in nature," said Mićanović.
According to unofficial information from the Rectorate, Mićanović recently told Božović that he would apply for the position of rector when the competition is announced, which, according to these sources, was met with disapproval from the current rector, given that, as they claim, another person is being projected for that position. Mićanović also allegedly expressed disagreement with the way in which the working versions of the future Statute of the University of Montenegro elaborate on the selection of the rector, claiming that it is about centralization, not democratization of the process.
Other sources from the Rectorate, however, claim that during that conversation, Mićanović allegedly indicated to Božović that he had the support of certain ruling political structures for his future candidacy, which caused the current rector to revolt. These sources claim that Božović told one of his closest associates until recently that he had been trying for years to ensure that “there was no external, especially political, influence on the autonomy of the University of Montenegro” and that “he no longer had confidence in him.”
The University of Montenegro did not directly comment on these claims, but, in response to questions about the future election of the rector, they stated that such questions were premature.
"As you know, the process of harmonizing the Statute of the University of Montenegro with the new Law on Higher Education is currently underway, and it is this act that will define a more detailed procedure for electing the rector," the UCG announced.
Although current events are described differently, several editorial sources claim that Božović asked Mićanović to resign at the meeting, which the vice-rector refused, after which a decision was made to transfer some of his previous teaching responsibilities to Perović.
Mićanović claims that he was not removed from the position of vice-rector.
"Although it was suggested in the oral interpretation that I resign, I firmly replied that there was no reason for that, on the contrary - behind my work are visible and recognizable results of work, a smooth and high-quality teaching process, the accreditation of numerous study programs...", stated Mićanović.
He also emphasized that he was not aware of any official initiative by the Senate or members of the UCG Board of Directors to remove him.
The University of Montenegro also confirmed that the replacement of Vice-Rector Mićanović has not been initiated.
"When electing the Vice-Rector, the Board of Directors envisaged that the more specific areas of the Vice-Rector's activities would be defined by a separate decision. However, in accordance with established practice, activities in various areas of importance to the University were implemented on the basis of direct agreement and coordination within the current University management. We emphasize that the entire Vice-Rector's team was involved in all activities of the University of Montenegro," the UCG stated.
Mićanović, however, believes that the decision is problematic due to the message it sends to potential candidates for rector.
"I suppose it is problematic to find reasons for this and write an explanation for such an initiative. I have to be subjective, you won't blame me, with this decision the focus of my activities has changed, I am no longer focused on the current activities of planning and implementing the teaching process, exam deadlines, unifying proposals for enrollment in the new academic year, systematizing associate positions and working on the accreditation field that awaits us next year, but the rector has left me more space to work on preparing a good program for a potential candidacy, for which I am extremely grateful," said Mićanović.
He added that the fact that he was asked to resign, which he refused, after which his powers were "questionably taken away", could be "a clear message to colleagues who meet the requirements for the competition for the position of rector".
"Perhaps this is a clear message to all those colleagues who meet the requirements for candidacy to reconsider their intention if they want to participate in this process...", said Mićanović.
Rector Božović's second, three-year term expires in June of next year, and the vacancy announcement must be made and the procedure initiated at least six months earlier.
Future Statute - a stumbling block?
In October last year, the Law on Higher Education was adopted, and all higher education institutions were given a period of 15 months to align their organization, work, and documents with the new regulation.
According to information from "Vijesti", amendments to the Statute of the University of Montenegro could soon be adopted, but the process has not been easy.
The stumbling block was allegedly the procedure for electing the rector, given that the new Law stipulates that this leader be elected by the Board of Directors (BOD), upon the proposal of the Senate.
According to the current Statute, the Senate's role was advisory - this body gave its opinion on the candidates, after which the Board of Directors decided on all of them.
"Vijesti" sources claim that the latest draft statute stipulates that candidates for rector present their vision of the development of the University of Montenegro before the Senate, and that this body can vote in several rounds until a single proposal is reached, which will be sent to the Board of Directors.
Not everyone at the University of Montenegro reportedly agrees with the proposed procedure, and they believe that all candidates who receive a certain form of support should be presented to the Board of Directors.
Mićanović claims that the working strategic document "caused strong disapproval from the members of the Board of Directors because it personified one personality, it was noticeable that it was written by one 'hand'."
"I would not talk about that, because I am not an actor who participated in any way in the development of this document. My view of the method of preparation and drafting not only the Statute but also all other by-laws is completely different from what was done. It is a document that applies to all organizational units, and accordingly, and according to the logic of things, not to mention the democratic process, it would be natural for all subjects to participate equally in their development, and for a joint document to be legally agreed on based on that participation. This is the basic principle of democracy present in democratic educational and social systems," he said.
He recalled that "at the beginning of the 20s, there were advocates for direct and open procedures for electing rectors."
"This was met with enthusiasm by the academic community, not to mention that individuals came to the University of Montenegro advocating such a principle, but over time it has suffocated, I would not say disappeared. It is clear why it stopped! The process of controlling the desired outcome is problematic. The democratic practice of numerous universities is based on the paradigm of wider choice and only such an approach gives legitimacy to a truly elected rector," he concluded.
See more:
Download the app and follow the news
FOLLOW US ON
