The main topic of the article concerns the opinion of the Venice Commission on the legal and institutional crisis in Montenegro, particularly regarding the issue of the retirement of Constitutional Court judge Dragana Đuranović. Political scientist Nikoleta Đukanović emphasizes the necessity of forming a working group to satisfy the needs of all political actors and find compromise solutions. It is highlighted that Montenegro faces a deep legal and institutional crisis, with conflicting interpretations of laws and abuses. The European Commission’s non-paper identifies problems in implementing judicial reforms, the independence of the judicial and prosecutorial councils, pressures on the judiciary, and a large number of outdated cases. Đukanović believes it is important for politicians to address the root causes of the problems, not just the consequences, and that there is a need for judicial reform and system recovery. The Ministry of Justice’s working group should interpret the Venice Commission’s recommendations and seek political compromises, especially on sensitive issues for the opposition and government.
Political Perspectives:
Left: Left-leaning sources emphasize the need for comprehensive judicial reform and criticize the political actors for contributing to the institutional crisis. They highlight the importance of respecting the Venice Commission’s recommendations and ensuring judicial independence to strengthen democracy and rule of law in Montenegro.
Center: Center-leaning sources focus on the necessity of political compromise and dialogue among all actors to resolve the legal crisis. They stress the importance of forming a working group to interpret the Venice Commission’s opinion and implement reforms pragmatically, balancing different political interests.
Right: Right-leaning sources may emphasize the political manipulation behind the crisis and question the effectiveness of external recommendations like those from the Venice Commission. They might focus on sovereignty concerns and the need to protect national interests while cautiously approaching judicial reforms.
