UPDATE: A heated legal confrontation ignited in Montenegro as experts argue whether a controversial agreement with the Ujedinjeni Arapski Emirati (UAE) falls under the jurisdiction of the Ustavni sud (Constitutional Court). This urgent public discussion occurred yesterday, October 23, 2023, with six legal specialists asserting that the agreement concerning tourism and real estate impacts foreign property rights and warrants constitutional review.
The debate stems from separate initiatives led by Đorđe Zenović, a local parliament member, and the Centar za zaštitu i proučavanje ptica (CZIP), challenging the constitutionality of the law ratifying the agreement. They claim it was passed by a mere simple majority of 41 votes rather than the required two-thirds majority, raising significant legal concerns.
In stark contrast, the government, represented by Minister Majda Adžović, maintains that the agreement does not regulate foreign property rights and is therefore not subject to constitutional scrutiny. Adžović claims that historical practices of the court support this position, arguing that any review could jeopardize Montenegro’s international obligations.
Zenović criticized this governmental stance, labeling it as a dangerous undermining of constitutional order. He emphasized, “This could lead to a situation where bilateral agreements could override constitutional obligations. If the Constitutional Court dismisses these initiatives, it could set a perilous precedent for any future government actions.”
Moreover, legal experts raised alarms that the agreement could enable foreign entities to acquire property rights contrary to existing laws, potentially fostering discrimination against citizens from other countries. They argue that such legal frameworks could allow investors to bypass environmental assessments required for development projects, thus threatening Montenegro’s ecological integrity.
In a significant development, the Venecijanska komisija (Venice Commission) has previously cautioned that revisiting ratified international agreements through constitutional review could place Montenegro in conflict with its international obligations. Adžović reiterated that the Constitution does not empower the Constitutional Court to assess the compliance of international treaties with domestic law, highlighting concerns about the implications for EU accession negotiations.
Legal scholars, including prof. dr Vladimir Đurić and prof. dr Maja Kostić-Mandić, voiced their apprehensions regarding the transparency and legality of the agreement’s approval process, pointing out that the Parliament’s actions could lead to substantial economic liabilities for Montenegro.
As the Constitutional Court deliberates on these initiatives, the implications of this case are profound, affecting not only the legal landscape but also Montenegro’s international standing and local governance. The court is expected to release a statement regarding these initiatives in the coming days.
Citizens and stakeholders are urged to stay informed as this pivotal case unfolds, potentially reshaping Montenegro’s constitutional framework and its relationship with foreign investors. The urgency of this situation cannot be overstated, as it involves fundamental rights and the rule of law within Montenegro.
