Montenegro is facing serious attempts of historical revisionism which, according to Daliborka Uljarević from the Center for Civic Education, are ideologically motivated and aim to redefine the fundamental values of society. Institutions remain silent out of fear or political interests, further undermining the foundations of the civic state. Uljarević warns about the government’s lack of transparency and disregard for democratic procedures, as seen in the case of the retirement of a Constitutional Court judge. The Venice Commission identified procedural violations, but there are no effective institutional responses. This situation raises concerns about the threat to legal certainty and the rule of law in Montenegro.
Political Perspectives:
Left: The left-leaning perspective emphasizes the dangers of ideological revisionism as a threat to democratic values and civic society in Montenegro. It highlights the passivity and complicity of institutions in allowing political interests to undermine the rule of law and historical truth. The narrative focuses on the need for transparency, accountability, and protection of democratic standards.
Center: The centrist view acknowledges the concerns about revisionism and institutional passivity but tends to focus on the procedural aspects, such as the findings of the Venice Commission and the importance of following constitutional procedures. It stresses the need for balanced and lawful responses to maintain stability and legal certainty in Montenegro’s democratic development.
Right: The right-leaning perspective may frame the issue as a political struggle involving different ideological groups, possibly downplaying the severity of revisionism or attributing it to political bias. It might emphasize national identity and sovereignty, viewing some institutional actions as necessary or justified, while criticizing external influences or opposition forces.
