Montenegro - January 2025

A mass shooting on 1 January in Cetinje, which resulted in the deaths of 12 people, including children, has raised concerns about security and violence in Montenegro. The country is reported to have the sixth highest number of illegal weapons per capita in the world. The police response during the incident has faced criticism, though Prime Minister Milojko Spajić defended the police, citing shortages in law enforcement personnel due to retirements. Civil society organizations pointed out that despite Cetinje being home to over a hundred members of organized crime groups and the site of a similar mass shooting in 2022, the town has minimal police presence. In response to the tragedy, Prime Minister Spajić announced a two-month amnesty for individuals who surrender illegal weapons, along with tougher prison sentences for those caught with illegal firearms after the amnesty period. He also proposed additional gun control measures and a new Law on Weapons. 

Sources: Balkan Insight (1), Balkan Insight (2), Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Vijesti 

The Parliament Constitutional Committee’s December 2024 decision to end Constitutional Court Judge Dragana Đuranović’s tenure upon retirement, deviating from the procedures established in the Constitution and the Law on the Constitutional Court, exposed weaknesses in the separation of powers. The opposition blocked Parliament’s work and demanded the annulment of the decision. For a judge’s termination to be formally recognized, the Court must adopt a decision by majority vote (at least four affirmative votes) and notify Parliament, which is then responsible for announcing the vacancy. However, the Court voted against notifying Parliament in June 2024. Four judges opposed the notification (citing the Labour Law) and two supported it (based on the Pensions and Disability Insurance Law). Experts argue that the differing interpretations of the legislation regarding retirement are driven by the self-interest of some of the judges. They also argue that the vote is questionable because two judges whose terms should have ended, along with Đuranović, participated in the vote. The latter thus violated the rule that no one can judge their own case. Had Đuranović recused herself, it is likely that no decision would have been reached, allowing Parliament to step in, as it did in the past. The European Commission raised concerns, urged legal reforms, and proposed a Venice Commission review.  

Sources: Balkan Insight, Akcija za Ljudska Prava (1), Akcija za Ljudska Prava (2), Antena M, Vijesti (1), Vijesti (2), Vijesti  (3)