COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2025 Rule of Law Report Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Montenegro Accompanying the document Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions 2025 Rule of Law Report The rule of law situation in the European Union
Date: 2025-07-08
Institutions: European Commission, Secretariat-General
Subjects: Montenegro, administrative transparency, corruption, democracy, freedom of the press, human rights, independence of the judiciary, pluralism in the media, rule of law, whistleblowing

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Strasbourg, 8.7.2025  SWD(2025) 929 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2025 Rule of Law Report                                Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Montenegro Accompanying the document Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions 2025 Rule of Law Report                                  The rule of law situation in the European Union {COM(2025) 900 final} - {SWD(2025) 901 final} - {SWD(2025) 902 final} - {SWD(2025) 903 final} - {SWD(2025) 904 final} - {SWD(2025) 905 final} - {SWD(2025) 906 final} - {SWD(2025) 907 final} - {SWD(2025) 908 final} - {SWD(2025) 909 final} - {SWD(2025) 910 final} - {SWD(2025) 911 final} - {SWD(2025) 912 final} - {SWD(2025) 913 final} - {SWD(2025) 914 final} - {SWD(2025) 915 final} - {SWD(2025) 916 final} - {SWD(2025) 917 final} - {SWD(2025) 918 final} - {SWD(2025) 919 final} - {SWD(2025) 920 final} - {SWD(2025) 921 final} - {SWD(2025) 922 final} - {SWD(2025) 923 final} - {SWD(2025) 924 final} - {SWD(2025) 925 final} - {SWD(2025) 926 final} - {SWD(2025) 927 final} - {SWD(2025) 928 final} - {SWD(2025) 930 final} - {SWD(2025) 931 final}  
 
 
ABSTRACT 

Montenegro  is  working  on  the  implementation  of  the  2024-2027  Judicial  Reform  Strategy 
and  its  accompanying  2024-2025  action  plan,  yet  not  all  planned  activities  for  2024  have 
been fully implemented. The implementation of the previously amended legal framework has 
yielded some initial positive results, while the composition of the Judicial and Prosecutorial 
Councils  remains  to  be  further  improved.  The  lack  of  a  dedicated  law  on  labour  rights  of 
judges remains a challenge. The new President of the Supreme Court has been appointed by 
unanimity,  while  the  filling  of  judicial  and  prosecutorial  positions  remains  to  be  ensured. 
Implementation  of  measures  to  enhance  judicial  digitalisation  is  in  progress.  Challenges  as 
regards human resources, ICT  and infrastructures continued. The Judicial and Prosecutorial 
Councils’ public communication and transparency are improving, but there is still room for 
improvement  to  ensure  full  transparency  on  the  publication  of  reasoned  decisions  on 
promotions,  appointments,  and  disciplinary  cases.  Some  improvements  have  been  achieved 
on efficiency, while significant backlogs persist in administrative cases.   

The implementation of the 2024-2028 strategy for the fight against corruption and its 2024-
2025  action  plan  is  ongoing,  but  challenges  remain  concerning  the  monitoring  of  its 
implementation.  The  track  record  of  investigations  and  prosecutions  in  cases  of  high-level 
corruption  continues  to  improve,  but  the  low  number  of  final  convictions  and  lack  of 
effective  and  deterrent  penalties  contributes  to  a  perception  of  impunity.  Human  resources 
capacities  in  the  fight  against  corruption  have  slightly  increased  but  remain  insufficient 
overall. The Agency for the Prevention of Corruption continued to carry out its tasks, despite 
some disruption caused by the expiration of the term of office of its management, ineffective 
governance  and  resource  constraints.  The  adoption  of  nine  by-laws  enabled  the  effective 
implementation  of  the  Law  on  Lobbying.  The  legal  framework  regulating  political  parties’ 
funding continues to be hampered by shortcomings in its scope, clarity and implementation. 
The implementation of the improved legal framework on the protection of whistleblowers is 
ongoing.  Progress  has  been  made  in  enhancing  public  procurement  transparency  with 
electronic systems. 

Delays in appointing members to the Councils of the Agency for Audiovisual Media Services 
and the Radio Television of Montenegro hinder the implementation of the media legislative 
framework. Rules on transparency of media ownership information have improved but only 
in  relation  to  media  providers.  The  legal  provisions  regulating  the  transparency  of  public 
funding allocations for media are yet to be fully implemented. The legal framework on access 
to  information  remains  to  be  amended,  but  there  are  significant  challenges  in  ensuring  its 
effective  implementation.  The  authorities  continue  to  provide  prompt  and  effective 
institutional and law enforcement responses to new cases of violence against journalists. 

An  established  framework  for  inclusive  legislative  processes  is  in  place,  but  challenges 
remain  in  terms  of  effectiveness  of  public  consultations.  A  deep  institutional  and  political 
crisis emerged over the decision of the Parliament to unilaterally declare the retirement of a 
Constitutional  Court  judge,  raising  concerns  about  the  respect  for  the  independence  of  the 
Constitutional Court. A new law on the Ombudsperson’s Office is being drafted to fully align 
with the Paris Principles and aimed at achieving an upgraded accreditation to ‘A’ status. Civil 
society  organisations  function  within  an  overall  enabling  environment,  although  several 
challenges persist. 

1 

 
 
I. 

JUSTICE SYSTEM1  

Independence  

The level of perceived judicial independence in Montenegro is now very low among the 
general public and is now low among companies. Overall, 26% of the general population 
and 35% of companies perceive the level of independence of courts and judges to be ‘fairly 
or  very  good’  in  20252. The  perceived  judicial  independence  among  the  general  public  has 
significantly  decreased  in  comparison  with  2024  (35%),  while  among  companies  it  has 
increased in  comparison with  2024 (28%).  The  main reason  cited by the  general  public for 
the perceived lack of independence of courts and judges is the perception of interference or 
pressure from the Government and politicians3.  

Work  on  the  implementation  of  the  2024-2027  Judicial  Reform  Strategy  and  its 
accompanying 2024-2025 action plan is ongoing, yet not all planned activities for 2024 
have been fully implemented. The implementation of the Judicial Reform Strategy, and its 
action plan, is being monitored by the Council for Monitoring the Strategy’s implementation. 
The  Council  has  adopted  a  methodology  for  reporting  and  monitoring  the  work  plan  and  a 
reporting  framework  for  all  involved  institutions,  and  it  has  also  published  its  first  annual 
implementation  report4.  With  regard  to  activities  for  2024,  22.1%  were  fully  implemented, 
58.4% partially, and 19.5% not implemented.  

The implementation of the previously amended legal framework has yielded some initial 
positive  results,  while  the  composition  of  the  Judicial  and  Prosecutorial  Councils 
remains to be further improved. After an intensive phase of reforms in 2024, the main laws 
guaranteeing the independence and impartiality of the judicial system are now broadly taking 
into  account  European  standards,  such  as  the  Law  on  Judicial  Council  and  Judges  and  the 
Law  on  State  Prosecution  Service.  As  a  result  of  these  amendments,  the  Judicial  and 
Prosecutorial  Councils  are  in  the  process  of  developing  a  new  system  of  appointment, 
evaluation of performance, and promotion of judges and state prosecutors. The new system 
aims to ensure a more consistent, merit-based assessment. To fully address recommendations 
of  the  European  Commission  and  Venice  Commission5,  the  Judicial  Council’s  composition 
remains  to  be  further  aligned  with  European  standards  as  regards  the  Minister  of  Justice’s 
role  as  an  ex  officio  member6  as  well  as  the  representation  of  peer-elected  judges7.  As 

1   An overview of the institutional framework for all four pillars can be found here.  
2   Flash  Eurobarometer  554  and  555  (2025).  The  level  of  perceived  judicial  independence is  categorised  as 
follows: very low (below 30% of respondents perceive judicial independence as fairly good and very good); 
low (between 30-39%), average (between 40-59%), high (between 60-75%), very high (above 75%). 

3    Flash Eurobarometer 554 and 555 (2025); Flash Eurobarometer 540 and 541 (2024). 
4  Ministry of Justice (2024). 
5   Besides the outstanding points on the Judicial and Prosecutorial Council and the law on the Special State 
Prosecution Office, a dedicated law on labour rights of judges is lacking and the shortcoming of the existing 
rules on evaluation of judges and court president are not yet addressed.  

6   Constitution of Montenegro, Article 128 (3). See also Venice Commission (2022). GRECO  (2020) , p. 4, 
recommended taking additional measures to strengthen the Judicial Council’s independence – both real and 
perceived  –  against  undue  political  influence,  including  by  abolishing  the  ex  officio  participation  of  the 
Minister  of  Justice  in  the  Council,  by  providing  for  no  less  than  half  of  the  Council’s  membership  to  be 
composed of judges who are elected by their peers and by  ensuring that the presiding function is given to 
one of those judicial members. 

7   Since ex-officio judge members (President of the Supreme Court) do not count as judges chosen by their 
peers,  currently  4  out  of  10  judges  of  the  Judicial  Council  are  selected  by  their  peers.  According  to  the 
recommendation of the Council of Europe, no less than half the members of such councils should be judges 

2 

 
 
 
 
constitutional  amendments  are  necessary,  the  Government  initiated  the  process  through  the 
adoption  of  a  governmental  draft.  Against  this  background,  the  new  Minister  of  Justice 
appointed in August 2024 has informally committed to continuing his predecessor’s practice 
of  not  participating  in  Judicial  Council  sessions.  Regarding  the  Prosecutorial  Council,  the 
introduction of an explicit provision in the Constitution on its composition and the method of 
election  of  its  members,  considered  as  a  more  sustainable  solution  by  the  Venice 
Commission, is still pending8. Furthermore, the Law on the Special State Prosecutor's Office 
(SSPO)  still  has  shortcomings  as  key  recommendations  by  the  Venice  Commission  with 
regard  to  increased  accountability,  clearer  operational  frameworks,  strengthened  personal 
data  protection,  and  a  strategy  to  reduce  the  significant  case  backlog  have  not  yet  been 
reflected9.  

The lack of a dedicated law on labour rights of judges remains a challenge10. There are 
presently two conflicting laws, and a specific law remains to be adopted on the work-related 
rights,  including  retirement  criteria,  for  all  judges  and  prosecutors,  including  Constitutional 
Court  judges,  as  recommended  by  the  Venice  Commission11.  In  response  to  the  concerns 
raised by the Association of Judges demanding salary increases and a special law regulating 
their labour rights, the Ministry of Justice initiated the drafting of a law on salaries and other 
rights related to the performance of judicial and constitutional court functions. In April 2025, 
the Government adopted amendments to the laws governing the Judicial Council and judges, 
as  well  as  the  State  Prosecutor’s  Office,  introducing  a  30%  salary  increase  for  judges  and 
prosecutors12.   

The new President of the Supreme Court has been appointed by unanimity, while the 
timely filling of judicial and prosecutorial positions remains to be ensured. In November 
2024,  the  Judicial  Council  appointed  a  new  permanent  President  of  the  Supreme  Court  by 
unanimity13. This appointment reinforces the independence, legitimacy, and stability of a key 
institution  in  the  judiciary,  after  nearly  four  years  of  this  post  being  occupied  ad  interim. 
However,  the  Judicial  Council  has  currently  one  vacant  position,  whereas  the  Prosecutorial 
Council has two unfilled positions. In general, the timely filling of judicial and prosecutorial 
positions  remains  a  challenge,  in  particular  due  to  remuneration  level.  For  instance,  by  the 
end  of  2024,  Montenegro  had  243  full-time  judges  out  of  329  planned  positions14.  This 

chosen  by  their  peers  from  all  levels  of  the  judiciary  and  with  respect  for  pluralism  inside  the  judiciary. 
Committee of Ministers (2010), para. 27.  

8    Montenegro  has  committed  to  address  this  aspect,  which  is  part  of  the  closing  benchmarks,  in  the  EU-
Montenegro  Stabilisation  and  Association  Agreement  14th  meeting  of  the  Subcommittee  on  Justice, 
Freedom and Security. See also Venice Commission (2024), para. 23. 

9   Venice Commission (2024a).  
10   2024 Rule of Law report, Montenegro, p. 3. 
11   In its previous opinions, the Venice Commission identified several elements for Montenegro to address in 
order  to  bring  the  current  rules  in  line  with  European  standards.  The  recommendations  concerned  the 
regulation of judges' work-related rights, including retirement age and pension entitlements; the limited use 
of 
to  exceptional 
circumstances; the alignment of evaluation and disciplinary procedures for judges with European standards; 
and  the  reinforcement  of  the  Judicial  Council's  independence  and  the  introduction  of  legal  safeguards  to 
prevent undue political influence. Venice Commission (2022, 2023, 2023a). 

temporary  anti-deadlock  mechanisms  for  key  appointments,  restricting 

them 

12  The  proposed  legislative  amendments  are  currently  pending  inclusion  in  the  Parliament's  agenda. 

Montenegrin Government (2025a), p.2. 

13   The new President of the Supreme Court is the former representative of Montenegro before the European 
Court  of  Human  Rights  in  Strasbourg  and  former  judge  of  the  High  Court  in  Podgorica.  BalkanInsight 
(2024). 

14   Montenegrin Government (2025), annex III.  

3 

 
 
 
represents  an  increase  in  vacancies  compared  to  the  previous  year.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
number of state prosecutors increased from 85 to 114 (out of 141 planned positions)15.  

The  promotion  and  enforcement  of  ethics,  professional  standards  among  judges  and 
prosecutors, and evaluation mechanisms has improved, yet concerns persist in ensuring 
the quality of evaluations and the consistency of sanctioning practice for Agency for the 
Prevention  of  Corruption  reports.  Following  appointments  of  new  members  to  both 
Councils,  their  work  on  evaluation  resumed  with  renewed  impetus  yielding  some  initial 
positive results16. Conversely, the rules for evaluating judges and court presidents still present 
concerns risking undermining their independence and judicial discretion in so far as they still 
foresee that the performance of judges who have 30% or more annulled decisions on appeal 
will be evaluated as “unsatisfactory”. This threshold was considered too low by the Venice 
Commission,  which  warned  against  its  negative  implications  on  judicial  independence  and 
judicial discretion17. The Judicial Council introduced for the first time a system of evaluation 
for  judges  of  the  Supreme  Court18.  In  addition,  the  Prosecutorial  Council’s  evaluation  of 
prosecutors  has  become  more  nuanced,  slowly  shifting  away  from  the  previous  practice  of 
uniformly rating  all prosecutors  as excellent19.  However, challenges  remain with  regards to 
the lack of systematic regular professional appraisals of judges and prosecutors carried out by 
the  Councils.  The  same  holds  true  as  regards  the  quality  of  appraisals,  which  often  lack  a 
detailed  assessment  of  individual  performance  and  capacity.  Furthermore,  the  legal 
framework  on  disciplinary  and  ethical  standards  for  judges  and  prosecutors  has  yet  to  be 
amended  to  strengthen  their  accountability,  while  the  Special  State  Prosecution  Office 
adopted new Rules of Procedure for the Ethics Code Commission 20. The disciplinary practice 
of the Judicial and Prosecutorial Councils continues to  present shortcomings which weaken 
the  verification  process  due  to  the  inconsistent  disciplinary  approach  in  sanctioning  judges 
and  prosecutors  for  not  submitting  reports  on  assets  and  incomes  to  the  Agency  for  the 
Prevention of Corruption.  

Instances  of  undue  public  influence  on  the  judiciary  continue  to  raise  the  concern  of 
some stakeholders. Despite both the Judicial and Prosecutorial Councils having established 

15   Montenegrin Government (2025a), p. 3. 
16   The Judicial Council’s Ethics Commission had finalised 13 cases by the end of 2024 (5 from 2022 and 8 
from 2023). The Council’s Disciplinary Commission initiated 7 disciplinary liability proceedings. Of these, 
three  cases  were  dismissed  as  unfounded,  one  annulled  and  three  are  being  reviewed.  The  Prosecutorial 
Council’s Ethics Commission handled 10 initiatives in 2024, two of which were from 2023. The Council’s 
Disciplinary  Commission  handled  6  cases,  including  one  from  2021  and  two  from  2023.  Montenegrin 
Government (2025), pp. 12, 13, 28, 29. 

17   Venice Commission (2022), para 52; Venice Commission (2023), para 21. See also Consultative Council of 

European Judges (2008).  

18   The  amendments  to  the  Law  on  the  Judicial  Council  and  Judges,  enacted  in  July  2024,  introduced  the 
evaluation  of  the  judges  of  the  Supreme  Court.  In  December  2024,  the  Judicial  Council  adopted  the 
Evaluation  Plan  for  2025,  and  in  April  2025,  it  introduced  new  Rules  on  the  evaluation  of  judges. 
Montenegrin Government (2025), pp. 7, 8.  

19   In  2024,  five  prosecutors  were  rated  as  good,  and  one  prosecutor  as  unsatisfactory,  indicating  a  more 
differentiated assessment of performance. New Rules for the Evaluation of State Prosecutors and Heads of 
State Prosecutor’s Offices have been drafted, but not adopted yet. Country visit Montenegro, Prosecutorial 
Council  and  the  Supreme  State  Prosecutor's  Office.  Montenegrin  Government  (2025),  p.  8.  Montenegrin 
Government (2025a), p.3. 

20   Moreover,  challenges  persist  in  implementing  new  ethical  codes  for  notaries,  public  bailiffs,  and  court 
interpreters, and the proposed Draft Code of Ethics for Lawyers is pending adoption by the Bar Association, 
a necessary step to improve its independence. Country visit Montenegro, Montenegrin Bar Association. See 
also 2024 Rule of Law Report, Montenegro, p. 6.  

4 

 
 
 
reporting  mechanism  of  undue  influence,  no  requests  for  protection  were  received  in  2024. 
Stakeholders  reported  instances  of  high-level  officials  and  political  figures  commenting  on 
ongoing  high-profile  cases,  judicial  decisions  or  the  actions  of  the  law  enforcement  and 
criminal  justice  system21,  which  may  contribute  to  undermining  the  public  trust  in  the 
judiciary. 

Quality  

The law on free legal aid has been amended to improve access to justice for vulnerable 
groups. The aim is to expand the scope of legal aid, particularly for vulnerable groups, with 
victims of torture now being eligible for free legal aid22, alongside other groups such as child 
victims  of  sexual  abuse  or  children  in  proceedings  for  the  protection  of  their  rights.  The 
amended law on free legal aid also introduces new requirements for lawyers providing legal 
assistance.  Only  specialised  lawyers  will  be  authorised  to  provide  legal  assistance  to 
vulnerable victims, including those of human trafficking and domestic violence. Stakeholders 
point out that awareness about availability of free legal aid should be reinforced23. 

Implementation of measures to enhance judicial digitalisation is in progress. Montenegro 
adopted a new 2025-2028 Judicial Digitalisation Strategy and its action plan24. The upgraded 
court  information  system  (PRIS)  used  for  case  allocation,  tracking,  management,  and 
communication  with  parties  is  expected  to  be  fully  implemented  by  the  end  of  the  year.  It 
aims to further improve the efficiency of case allocation and the use of judicial statistics.   

Challenges as regards human resources, ICT and infrastructure continued. The judicial 
system is impacted by inadequate human resources and physical conditions in courtrooms25. 
Stakeholders consider that the absence of competitive salaries undermines the attractiveness 
of a judicial career, affecting both the recruitment process of new judges and the motivation 
of existing ones to accept promotions to positions with greater responsibilities. Furthermore, 
Montenegro  has  not  started  the  effective  implementation  of  the  2024-2027  Plan  for  the 
Rationalisation  of  the  Judicial  Network,  which  represents  a  challenge.  Additionally,  at  all 
levels  of  the  judiciary,  the  allocated  working  spaces  and  working  conditions,  including 
equipment, continue to be inadequate, in particular for the Special State Prosecution Office, 
the High Court of Podgorica and the Supreme Court. In 2025, the judiciary budget increased 
from  EUR  32.7  million  to  EUR  34.2  million,  however  stakeholders  continue  to  consider  it 
insufficient to cope with critical needs of the sector26.  

The public communication and transparency of the Judicial and Prosecutorial Councils 
are improving, but there is  still room for improvement to ensure full transparency on 
the  publication  of  reasoned  decisions  on  promotions,  appointments,  and  disciplinary 
cases.  The  Judicial  and  the  Prosecutorial  Council  continue  to  ensure  public  attendance  to 
their  sessions  by  media  and  civil  society  organisations.  In  a  new  development,  they  have 

21   Country  visit  Montenegro,  Montenegrin  Bar  Association,  Prosecutorial  Council  and  State  Prosecutor’s 

office.  

22   See  also  European  Committee  for  the  Prevention  of  Torture  and  Inhuman  or  Degrading  Treatment  or 

23  

Punishment (2022), p.7. 
 European  Union  -  Council  of  Europe  Horizontal  Facility  action  (2025),  representatives  of  Basic  and 
Supreme Court. 

24   Montenegrin Government (2025b, 2025c).  
25   Country visit Montenegro, Chief State Prosecutor, Civils Society Organisations.  
26   Country visit Montenegro, Special State Prosecution Office, the High Court of Podgorica and the Supreme 

Court. 

5 

 
 
 
started  to  regularly  publish  their  decisions,  minutes  and  press  statements27.  Both  Councils 
have  also  adopted  strategic  documents  to  enhance  public  communication28.  The  public 
perception  of  transparency  has  improved,  with  55.7%  of  citizens  rating  the  prosecutor’s 
office as transparent, a 14.9% increase from 2023. This positive trend is expected to continue 
with the implementation of the Communication Strategy of the State Prosecutor’s Office and 
the  Prosecutor’s  Council  for  2023-202529.  Further,  the  Prosecutorial  Council  amended  its 
Rules of Procedure in June 2025, aiming to increase the transparency and clarity of reasoned 
decisions30. Despite these efforts, the Judicial and Prosecutorial Councils still face challenges 
in fully publishing reasoned decisions on promotions, appointments, and disciplinary cases. 

Efficiency 

Some improvements have been achieved on efficiency, while significant backlogs persist 
in administrative cases. The clearance rate in 2023 remained well below 100% in the two 
instances for the three categories of cases, meaning that there were more incoming cases than 
resolved  cases  over  the  year,  and  thus  the  numbers  of  pending  cases  are  increasing.  On 
administrative  cases,  the  number  of  incoming  cases  continued  to  rise  in  2023,  after  having 
already doubled from 2021 to 2022. In 2023, the first instance administrative cases clearance 
rate  was  at  40%  with  a  disposition  time  of  1 422  days,  while  in  2024  the  clearance  rate 
increased to 109% and the disposition time was reduced to 880 days31. In 2023, the trend was 
negative also for both instances of civil and commercial cases, the clearance rate fell and the 
disposition time increased, while the indicators registered a positive trend for both instances 
of  criminal  cases32.  The  workload  of  judges  at  the  Administrative  Court  is  seriously 
concerning, with one judge handling on average 2 513 cases in 2024, although the number of 
pending cases in 2024 decreased from 27 589 to 26 63833. The negative trend on handling of 
administrative  cases  hampers  the  development  of  the  business  environment  in  Montenegro 
and erodes trust in the justice system. In June 2025, the Constitutional Court had a backlog of 
2 069 cases, of which 1 739 are constitutional complaints.   

II. 

ANTI-CORRUPTION FRAMEWORK  

The  perception  among  experts,  citizens  and  business  executives  is  that  the  level  of 
corruption in the public sector remained high.  In the 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index 
by  Transparency  International,  Montenegro  scores  46/100  and  ranks  65th  globally34.  This 
perception  remained  relatively  stable  over  the  past  five  years35.  The  2025  Special 
Eurobarometer on Corruption shows that 88% of respondents consider corruption widespread in 
their country (EU average 69%) and 24% of respondents feel personally affected by corruption in 

27   Country visit Montenegro, Judicial Council and Prosecutorial Council. 
28   Montenegro Government (2025), p. 23; Delegation of the European Union to Montenegro (2024). 
29   Montenegrin Government (2025), p. 23. 
30 

In addition, the amended Rules of Procedure  establish the  publication of anonymised decisions related to 
state prosecutor evaluations and disciplinary actions. Montenegrin Government (2025a), p.6. 

31  Montenegrin Government (2025a), p.6. 
32  CEPEJ (2024), Dashboard Western Balkans. 
33   Judicial Council (2024), p. 152. See also Montenegrin Government (2025a), p.7.  
34   Transparency  International  (2025).  The  level  of  perceived  corruption  is  categorized  as  follows:  low  (the 
perception  among  experts  and  business  executives  of  public  sector  of  corruption  scores  above  79); 
relatively low (scores between 79-60), relatively high (scores between 59-50), high (scores below 50). 
35   In 2020 the score was 45, while, in 2024, the score is 46. The score significantly increases/decreases when 
it  changes  more  than  five  points;  improves/deteriorates  (changes  between  4-5  points);  is  relatively  stable 
(changes from 1-3 points) in the last five years. 

6 

 
 
 
their  daily  lives  (EU  average  30%).  As  regards  businesses,  79%  of  companies  consider  that 
corruption is widespread (EU average 63%) and 47% consider that corruption is a problem when 
doing business (EU average  35%). Furthermore, 21% of respondents find that there are enough 
successful prosecutions to deter people from corrupt practices (EU average  36%), while 32% of 
companies  believe  that  people  and  businesses  caught  for  bribing  a  senior  official  are 
appropriately  punished  (EU  average  33%)36.  Montenegro  is  not  yet  a  signatory  party  to  the 
OECD Anti-Bribery Convention. 

The  implementation  of  the  2024-2028  strategy  for  the  fight  against  corruption  and  its 
2024-2025  action  plan  is  ongoing,  but  challenges  remain  concerning  the  monitoring  of 
its  implementation.  The  National  Council  for  the  Fight  Against  Corruption  is  tasked  with 
monitoring and reporting on the implementation of the strategy and action plan. Counting on 
an  Operational  Team  composed  of  12  members  from  different  institutions  and  a 
coordinator37.  However,  concerns  remain  as  regards  the  Council’s  capacity  to  do  so,  as  its 
internal set-up, workplan and resources are not yet clear. According to some stakeholders, the 
absence  of  clear  indicators  and  benchmarks  may  affect  monitoring38.  The  cooperation 
framework  between  the  Agency  for  the  Prevention  of  Corruption  (ACA)  and  the  Council, 
recommended by the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO)39, remains to be adopted.  

The  track  record  of  investigations  and  prosecutions  in  cases  of  high-level  corruption 
continues to improve, but the low number of final convictions and lack of effective and 
deterrent penalties contribute to a perception of impunity. The amendments introduced in 
2024 to the Law on Special State Prosecutor’s Office (SPO) have significantly improved the 
efficiency of its work, and it opened investigations against 17 persons and filed indictments 
against 16 persons40. The SPO notably launched an investigation into the former Director of 
the Agency for the Prevention of Corruption (ACA) who was  indicted  for alleged abuse of 
office and damaging the state budget. As a result, the ACA’s Council dismissed the Director; 
this decision was annulled in first instance by the Administrative Court. In addition, the Basic 
Court  of  Podgorica  acquitted  the  former  Director  in  a  first-instance  verdict  over  charges  of 
tax evasion. This case is still ongoing. The number of investigations and prosecutions in high-
level corruption cases has risen consistently since 2022, establishing a trend of growth. The 
number of final convictions registered an increase in 2024, but they remain low compared to 
the number of high-level corruption cases on trial or under investigation. Stakeholders have 
raised concerns about a general practice of defence attorneys abusing the Criminal Procedure 
Code  guarantees  to  delay  criminal  proceedings  in  high-level  corruption  cases  without  valid 
justification41.  The enforcement of the guidelines  on the use  of plea bargain  agreements by 

36  Data from Special Eurobarometer 561 (2025) and Flash Eurobarometer 558 (2025). 
37   In October 2024, an Operational Team was established within the National Council tasked of reporting on 
the implementation of the Action Plan of the National Strategy for fight against corruption. The members of 
the  Operational  Team  are  representatives  from  General  Secretariat  of  the  Government,  the  Ministry  of 
Internal Affairs, the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of 
Finance,  the  Ministry  of  Public  Administration,  the  Police  Directorate,  the  Supreme  Court,  the  Supreme 
State  Prosecutor’s  Office,  the  Customs  Administration,  and  the  Tax  Administration.  To  be  noted  that  the 
National Council does not have any other operational or logistic support.  

38   Country visit Montenegro, Civil society organisation, Agency for prevention of corruption. 
39   GRECO (2024). 
40   Data  currently  made  available  by  the  Supreme  Court  do  not  allow  a  comparison  with  2023.  As  to  court 
decisions on the criminal offence of high-level corruption, out of 89 cases pending against 293 individuals 
and  10  legal  entities,  the  High  Court  in  Podgorica  resolved  27  cases  against  75  defendants.  Montenegrin 
Government (2025a), p. 72. Country Visit Montenegro, Special State Prosecutor’s Office. 

41   Country Visit Montenegro, Montenegrin Bar Association. 

7 

 
 
 
prosecutors  and judges in corruption cases is  contributing  to  a more effective and deterrent 
criminal  justice  response.  The  quality  of  indictments  and  verdicts  (including  decisions 
extending  detention  periods)  has  not  particularly  improved  nor  been  fully  harmonised 
amongst  courts  and  within  the  SPO  to  ensure  an  effective  prosecution  and  adjudication  in 
high-level corruption cases. Guidelines on the quality of reasoning and writing of indictment 
and  decisions,  alongside  quality  control  mechanisms  and  performance  indicators  in  the 
performance assessment of prosecutors and judges, remain to be adopted42. 

The human resources capacities in the fight against corruption have slightly increased 
but remain insufficient overall. In 2024, the Judicial Council appointed 5 new judges to the 
High Court of Podgorica43, increasing  the total  number to  11 judges44. At least  four judges 
will  be  allocated  to  the  Specialised  Department45,  where  the  backlog  of  cases  remains 
extremely  challenging46.  In  the  reporting  period,  there  were  no  completed  cases,  nor  were 
there any final decisions that were transferred from the Court of Appeal47. The SPO currently 
includes the Chief Special Prosecutor and 15 special prosecutors, out of 16 positions48. The 
amendments  adopted  to  the  Law  on  Special  Prosecution  Office,  which  limited  the  SPO’s 
competence  to  focus  on  acts  of  organised  crime,  corruption  committed  by  high-ranking 
public officials and money laundering, yielded positive results in terms of efficiency49. This 
has  reduced  the  number  of  cases  handled  per  special  prosecutor  and  the  scope  of  their 
investigations50.  The  human  resources  situation  in  the  Special  Police  Department  (SPU)  is 
improving,  but  remains  insufficient51,  despite  the  adoption  of  a  new  Rulebook  on  Internal 
Organisation  and  Systematisation  of  the  Ministry  of  the  Interior  in  December  202452.    The 
procedure for recruiting new police officers has begun, particularly in the unit dealing with 
the  fight  against  high-level  corruption  and  money  laundering.  Additionally,  the  procedure 
should ensure a merit-based recruitment.  Furthermore, the SPU lacks  specialised initial and 
continuous trainings  in  financial investigations,  with  no regular courses  on this topic in  the 
police  academy’s  curriculum.  Overall,  the  human  resources  are  deemed  insufficient  by  the 
three bodies to  cope with  their workload and  responsibilities. In addition, the infrastructure 
conditions of the three bodies remain poor and the equipment and technological tools would 
need further enhancement, limiting their efficiency overall53.  

The  Agency  for  the  prevention  of  corruption  continued  to  carry  out  its  tasks  despite 
some  disruption  caused  by  the  expiration  of  the  term  of  office  of  its  management, 
ineffective  governance  and  resource  constraints.  A  new  Council  of  the  Agency  for  the 
prevention  of  corruption  (ACA)  was  elected,  although  a  full-term  Director  remains  to  be 

42   Country visit Montenegro, Special State Prosecutor’s Office, High Court of Podgorica. 
43   The specialised court for criminal proceedings punishable by law by imprisonment over 10 years, organised 

crime, high-level corruption, money laundering, terrorism and war crimes. 

44    Country visit Montenegro, High Court.  
45   The Specialised Department of the High Court in Podgorica deals with high level corruption and complex 

organised crime.  

46   The  Special  Department  of  the  High  Court  in  Podgorica  has  8  unresolved  cases  of  cigarette  smuggling 
against 53 persons; 9 unresolved cases of money laundering against 72 defendants; 90 unresolved cases of 
organized crime against 666 defendants; 19 unresolved cases of human trafficking against 35 defendants. 

47   Montenegrin Government (2025), p. 73. 
48   Ibid. 
49   Montenegrin Government (2025), p. 60. 
50   The Law on Amendments to the Law on Special State Prosecutor's Office was adopted on 6 June 2024. 
51   Country visit Montenegro, Special Police Unit. 
52   Since the adoption of a new Rulebook on Internal Organisation and Systematisation the number of positions 

from 50 to 60; only 27 positions are currently filled. 

53   Country visit Montenegro, Special Police Unit. 

8 

 
 
 
appointed  since  April  2024,  which  limits  the  legitimacy  of  the  Agency’s  leadership  and 
strategic  direction54.  The  number  of  actions  to  prevent  corruption  continued  to  increase 
although  the  overall  impact  of  the  Agency’s  work  remains  limited  in  practice.  Its  working 
methods  and  governance  remain  to  be  improved  as  a  bureaucratic  approach  continues  to 
impede the effectiveness of its work. In addition, the ACA’s independence, impartiality and 
accountability present challenges55. The ACA adopted its 2025 verification plan for income 
and  asset  reports,  which  includes  second  level  verification  of  a  targeted  sample  of 
approximately  500  declarations  and  in-depth  verifications  of  up  to  30  public  officials.  The 
Agency continued the implementation of its step-by-step methodology to verify income and 
asset reports and a risk-based approach to initiating ex officio cases, which contributes to the 
impartiality of its action. The ACA continued to enforce its sanctioning policy56 and adopted 
a  more  restrictive  interpretation  of  the  legislation  on  incompatibility  of  functions  and 
conflicts of interest. This led to a reduction of the categories included in the registry of public 
officials,  allowing  the  Agency  to  work  more  efficiently.  In  addition  to  the  prior-to-
appointment integrity checklist being applied to top executive functions and to the Agency’s 
future employees57, the ACA adopted new rules for recruiting staff58. The structural weakness 
of ACA in terms of human resources did not improve and the financial independence of the 
ACA  remains  to  be  fully  ensured59.  This  is  an  obstacle  for  the  implementation  of  the 
Agency’s overall mandate and recruitment plan for 2025, as well as a risk to its performance. 

The enforcement  mechanism ensuring respect with the rules of the code of conduct of 
the  Government  remains  to  be  adopted.  Numerous  institutions  have  specific  codes  of 
conduct. However, the Government’s Code of Conduct remains ineffective as the adoption of 
a law on government with disciplinary penalties is pending. The Code of Police Ethics and 
Ethics Committee was adopted in 2021.  

The  adoption  of  nine  by-laws  has  enabled  the  effective  implementation  of  the  Law  on 
Lobbying.  The  legal  framework  on  lobbying  improved  with  the  adoption  of  nine  by-laws 
covering specific sectors, which allows for the full enforcement of the Law on Lobbying60. 
The  ACA  has  received  a  report  for  illegal  lobbying,  and  the  procedure  for  determining 

54   The Director is a managing body of the ACA, together with the ACA Council. The Director is responsible 
for  representing  the  Agency,  organizing  and  overseeing  its  work,  making  decisions,  giving  opinions  and 
recommendations and taking other measures falling within the jurisdiction of the Agency, and performing 
other duties as prescribed by law (Art 95 of the Law on prevention of corruption). At the proposal of the 
Anti-Corruption  Committee  of  the  Parliament  of  Montenegro,  the  Parliament  elects  the  members  of  the 
ACA Council which then appoints the Director. 2024 Rule of Law Report, Montenegro, p. 9. 

55   In  2024,  11  905  income  and  asset  declarations,  13  141  in  2023,  were  administratively  and  technically 
verified. In addition, the ACA verified the  accuracy and completeness of 665 declarations and performed 
in-depth  verification  of  income  and  assets  declarations  of  20  public  officials  selected  based  on  their 
corruption risk profile. ACA (2025), p. 12. 

56   In  2024,  the  ACA  initiated  1  261  misdemeanour  proceedings,  2  018  in  2023.  1  474  proceedings  were 
completed  before  the  competent  misdemeanour  courts  upon  requests  of  the  ACA,  imposing  sanctions  in 
1 075 cases, with fines amounting for EUR 112 750. 

57   In 2024, the ACA issued 191 opinions, 227 in 2023. ACA (2025), p. 25. 
58   The  ACA  currently  employs  54  people  out  of  98 foreseen  by  the  Rulebook  adopted  in October  2024.  In 
January 2025, the ACA Council adopted Rules for the Recruitment and Filling of Vacant Positions in the 
ACA,  based  on  public  advertisements.  According  to  new  provisions  of  the  Law  on  Prevention  of 
Corruption,  the  ACA  still  needs  to  develop  additional  employment  procedures  aligned  with  the  Labour 
Law. 

59   The  budget  foreseen  for  2025  is  EUR  884  832.46,  which  is  below  the  legally  required minimum  (0.14% 

against 0.2% of the State Budget as prescribed by the Law on Prevention of Corruption). 

60   In 2024, five individuals and one legal entity were registered in the lobbyists' register, bringing the total in 

the register to 16 individuals and two legal entities. ACA (2025), p. 32. 

9 

 
 
 
possible illegal lobbying is ongoing. Considering that the new Law on Lobbying came into 
force on 12 June 2024, the ACA provided state authorities and lobbyists with comprehensive 
information on the key novelties introduced by the Law. 

The legal framework regulating political parties’ funding continues to be hampered by 
shortcomings in its scope, clarity and implementation. Despite recommendations from the 
OSCE-ODIHR61  and  GRECO62,  the  Law  on  Financing  of  Political  Entities  and  Election 
Campaign has not been amended yet. Therefore, the current legal framework lacks effective 
safeguards  against  the  circumvention  of  rules  on  transparency,  control  over  political  party 
spending and prevention from abuse of state resources. Additionally, the Law on election of 
Councillors  and  Members  of  Parliament  is  still  not  aligned  with  the  Law  on  financing  of 
political entities and election campaigns, further preventing a correct and efficient control on 
electoral  campaign  financing63.  In  2024,  the  Agency  for  the  prevention  of  corruption 
monitored electoral campaigns for six municipalities64, however the legal framework remains 
unclear.  In  2024,  the  State  Audit  Institution  (SAI)  continued  its  work  on  auditing 
consolidated  financial  statements  of  political  entities65.  However,  the  follow-up  to  SAI’s 
opinions and reports by  other competent authorities,  including  the  National  Council for the 
fight  against  corruption,  remains  challenging  due  to  shortcomings  in  the  legal  and 
institutional framework66. However, even if SAI expresses adverse opinions on the financial 
the  competent 
statements  of  political  entities  and  requires  consultative  hearings, 
parliamentary Committee has no obligation to act.   

improved 

implementation  of  the 

legal  framework  on  the  protection  of 
The 
whistleblowers  is  ongoing.  Montenegro  is  making  progress  in  implementing  its  improved 
legal  framework  for  protecting  whistleblowers,  as  introduced  in  the  Law  on  Prevention  of 
Corruption.  In  2024,  the  ACA  received  163  whistleblowers’  reports  (190  in  2023)  and 
forwarded 23 reports to the prosecutors’ offices and 46 to other competent institutions67. The 
ACA  concluded  a  record  116  procedures  and  identified  threats  to  the  public  interest  in  25 
cases,  a  considerably  higher  number  against  previous  year  (4  in  2023)68.  A  dedicated 
Whistleblower  Law  to  improve  the  functionality  and  coherence  of  the  system  and  the 

61   OSCE (2023), as well as previous OSCE/ODHIR recommendations. Among others, some procedural issues 
hamper the effectiveness of the Law on Financing of Political Entities and Election Campaign, e.g.: ACA 
verifies whether registered voters made reported donations, and verifies that a donation is not from a person 
convicted for corruption. However, ACA verifies whether donors are directors of public contractors but not 
owners of or shareholders in public contractors, because the database on public procurement of the Ministry 
of Finance contains only the names of the directors of public contractors. 

62   GRECO (2010). 
63  The Parliament has initiated the drafting of a new Law aimed at overcoming the existing shortcomings in 

the legal framework.  

64   Budva, Andrijevica, Gusinje, Kotor, Podgorica and Berane. 
65   The  SAI  audited  consolidated  financial  statements  of  10  political  entities  from  2023,  issuing  20  audit 
opinions and 110 audit recommendations The recommendations issued concern the financial statements of 
political  entities.  The  task  of  the  audit  is  to  check  whether  the  political  entity  acted  in  line  with  the 
regulations identified as criteria for the given audit; whether the financial resources are used for the purpose 
of accomplishing the goals determined in the  Program and Statute of the political entity.  SAI (2025), pp, 
1,2. 

66   The  SAI  representatives  repeatedly  highlighted  that  their  reports  often  do  not  receive  any  follow-up  by 
other  competent  institutions,  including  the  National  Council  for  fight  against  corruption.  Moreover,  they 
underlined  that  the  current  institutional  framework  of  the  National  Council  should  be  improved,  so  as  to 
prescribe actions to be taken by the National Council, namely to react to reports from other bodies.   

67   ACA (2025), p. 5 
68  

Ibid. 

10 

 
 
 
protection  of  whistleblowers  are  currently  lacking  and  are  expected  to  be  developed  by  the 
third quarter of 202569. 

Measures  aimed  at  addressing  corruption  in  the  identified  high-risk  areas  are  being 
implemented. Through the implementation of the new 2024-2028 Anticorruption Strategy70, 
the Agency for the prevention of corruption continued assessing the integrity plans of public 
institutions and monitoring their adoption and implementation. To date, the Agency assessed 
the integrity plans of prosecutorial and judicial bodies, with an assessment report completed 
in 2024 and due to be published soon. The Agency for the prevention of corruption plans to 
apply the methodology to other high-risk sectors, as identified in the National Anticorruption 
Strategy,  including  independent  and  regulatory  authorities,  with  adjustments  made  to  suit 
each  selected  sector.  In  addition,  the  Government  conducted  assessments  of  potential 
corruption risks for legislative initiatives in line with its methodology.  

Progress has been made in enhancing public procurement transparency with electronic 
systems.  Montenegro  has  implemented  a  red  flag  system  in  its  e-procurement  system  to 
detect  irregularities  in  public  procurement  procedures.  The  electronic  European  Single 
Procurement  Document  (ESPD)  in  the  e-procurement  system  was  introduced  in  2024, 
resulting in a significant reduction in complaints71. 

III.  MEDIA PLURALISM AND MEDIA FREEDOM  

Delays  in  appointing  members  to  the  Councils  of  the  Agency  for  Audiovisual  Media 
Services  and  the  Radio  Television  of  Montenegro  hinder  the  implementation  of  the 
media  legislative  framework.  During  the  reporting  period,  the  Parliament  failed  twice  to 
appoint new members of the Council of the Agency for Audiovisual Media Services (AMU) 
and  delayed  initiating  the  appointment  procedure  for  the  Council  of  Radio  Television  of 
Montenegro (RTCG). Full implementation of the legislative improvements introduced in the 
new  laws,  including  through  transparent  and  merit-based  appointments,  remains  to  be 
achieved  to  ensure  the  proper  functioning  and  full  independence  of  the  AMU  and  RTCG. 
Although  the  appointment  process  for  the  Director  General  of  RTCG  had  previously  been 
challenged by multiple court rulings, in August 2024, the RTCG Council appointed the same 
person to a full-term position, raising questions about the lack of transparency and a possible 
breach of legal procedure. In November 2024, the prosecution authorities filed an indictment 
against members of the RTCG Council on grounds of abuse of office during the appointment 
of the RTCG Director General. The  criminal  proceedings in  the case  are  currently ongoing 
before the Podgorica Basic Court.  

Rules  on  transparency  of  media  ownership  information  have  improved  but  only  in 
relation to media providers. Although ownership transparency has improved following the 
adoption  of  the  new  Media  Law,  there  remain  a  number  of  influential  online  news  media 
outlets that do not provide information on ownership despite the new obligations in the media 
law. Additionally, the availability of media ownership information remains restricted to those 

69   Montenegrin Government (2025), p. 10.  
70   The Strategy identified the following 6 fields of activities particularly prone to corruption risks: 1. Work of 
the  prosecution  and  courts,  2.  Work  of  the  police  and  the  Customs  Administration,  3.  Environment, 
urbanism and spatial planning, 4. Public procurement, 5. Work of local self-government, 6. The operation 
of state-owned enterprises, i.e. owned by local companies. 

71   In  the  first  quarter of  2025, only  5  complaints  were  filed  against  over  500  published  public  procurement 

procedures. 

11 

 
 
 
media  entities  that  have  undergone  formal  registration.  Some  stakeholders  point  out  that 
media outlets owned by companies established in Serbia have a strong influence in the media 
market and continue to be dominating recipients of state advertising72.  

The legal provisions regulating the transparency of public funding allocations for media 
are yet to be fully implemented. In 2023, 56% of registered media and 64% of public sector 
entities  complied  with  the  legal  requirement  to  disclose  the  public  funding  received  and 
allocated to media, respectively73. Following the adoption of new media legislation, the issue 
of unregistered online media has yet to be fully resolved in line with applicable international 
standards. The economic viability of commercial media remained constrained by a relatively 
small audience base and limited advertising market. The new Media Law of 2024 introduced 
a major increase in state funding for content of public interest in broadcast, print and online 
media,  raising  the  Media  Pluralism  and  Diversity  Fund  from  0.09%  to  0.2%  of  the  current 
national  budget.  This made public funding  an increasingly significant  source of income for 
commercial  media.  In  addition,  the  new  Media  Law  introduced  media  self-regulation  as  a 
prerequisite  for  accessing  funding  from  the  Media  Pluralism  and  Diversity  Fund,  and 
membership  in  the  Council  for  Media  Self-Regulation  increased  significantly.  By  March 
2025, the Council's membership increased to 67 media outlets74.  

The  legal  framework  on  access  to  information  remains  to  be  amended,  but  there  are 
significant  challenges  in  ensuring  its  effective  implementation.  In  January  2025,  the 
Government  adopted  a  new  Law  on  Free  Access  to  Information,  which  is  currently  under 
consideration by the Parliament. However, the draft proposal does not sufficiently address the 
conduction  of  inspections  and  the  need  for  harmonisation  with  the  Open  Data  Directive. 
However,  the  situation  in  the  Agency  for  Personal  Data  Protection  and  Free  Access  to 
Information is a concern. Its independence, human resources and financial capacities are not 
sufficiently  strong  to  enable  it  to  exercise  its  competences  effectively  and  efficiently.  A 
notable  example  is  the  decision  of  the  Ministry  of  Finance  to  significantly  reduce  the 
Agency’s 2025 budget. Additionally, the Agency’s Director resigned in December 2024 after 
being appointed in January of the same year75. Montenegro has ratified the Council of Europe 
Convention on Access to Official Documents76.  

The  authorities  continue  to  provide  prompt  and  effective  institutional  and  law 
enforcement response to new cases of verbal and physical violence against journalists. In 
2024, the prosecution authorities handled 14 cases of verbal and physical violence or threats 
against  journalists,  issuing  indictments  in  three  cases  and  initiating  misdemeanour 
proceedings in  four  77. The police recorded 16 cases of violence against media, including 7 
classified  by  the  prosecution  authorities  as  criminal  offences,  most  cases  involving 
harassment and online threats. Additionally, three journalists remain under police protection. 
Instances  of  verbal  attacks  on  the  media  by  public  officials  and  political  parties  have 
continued to occur. Since the publication of the 2024 Rule of Law Report, three new alerts 
have  been  recorded  for  Montenegro  in  the  Council  of  Europe’s  Platform  to  Promote  the 

72   Country visit Montenegro, Civil Society Organizations. 
73   Country visit Montenegro, Agency for Audiovisual Media Service. 
74   Montenegrin Government (2025), p. 33. 
75   Agency for Personal Data Protection and Free Access to Information (2024). 
76   The Council of Europe Convention on Access to Official Documents (CETS No. 205), also known as the 

Tromsø Convention, entered into force on 1 December 2020. 

77  Montenegrin Government (2025a), pp. 10, 11. 

12 

 
 
 
Protection of Journalism and Safety of Journalists78, relating to attacks on physical safety and 
integrity, and harassment and intimidation of journalists79. The platform registers eight active 
alerts  in  total.  The Media Freedom  Rapid  Response platform has recorded twelve incidents 
consisting  in  2  ‘physical  assaults’,  1  ‘attack  to  property’,  10  ‘verbal  attacks’,  3  ‘legal 
incidents’,  and  1  ‘interference’80.  There  have  been  no  notable  cases  of  strategic  lawsuit 
against public participation (SLAPP) against media outlets or journalists81. 

IV. 

OTHER INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES RELATED TO CHECKS AND BALANCES 

An  established framework for inclusive legislative processes is  in place, but challenges 
remain  in  terms  of  effectiveness  of  public  consultations.  A  framework  for  an  inclusive 
legislative  process  exists,  notably  also  on  public  consultation.  Nevertheless,  stakeholders 
continue to encounter challenges in its implementation. The quality of legal drafts proposed 
by  Members  of  Parliament  is  low,  often  lacking  regulatory  impact  assessments  or  public 
consultations  and  with  almost  non‑existent  quality  control.  The  Ministry  of  Finance  is 
currently  working  on  introducing  standards  for  comprehensive  regulatory  impact  analysis, 
which  will  assess  the  impact  on  the  economy,  citizens,  budget,  society,  and  environment 
before  implementing  new  regulatory  solutions82.  With  regard  to  fast-track  procedures,  in 
2024 the Government proposed 122 draft laws83, 42 of which were recommended for urgent 
adoption, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure of the Government of Montenegro84. 

A deep institutional and political crisis emerged over the decision of the Parliament to 
unilaterally  declare  the  retirement  of  a  Constitutional  Court  judge,  raising  concerns 
about  the  respect  for  the  independence  of  the  Constitutional  Court.  On  17  December 
2024,  tensions  escalated  following  the  Parliament’s  decision  on  the  retirement  of  a 
Constitutional Court judge. This decision was not in line with the procedure foreseen in the 
Constitution, which requires a plenary decision of the Constitutional Court 85 as also stated by 
the  Venice  Commission86  and  sparked  a  serious  crisis  within  Parliament.  The  crisis  stems 
from  a  lack  of  clear  rules  on  judicial  retirement  for  judges  due  to  conflicting  secondary 
legislation. These developments raised strong concerns about the respect for independence of 
the Constitutional Court and separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution87. A political 
agreement  was  reached  in  mid-March,  paving  the  way  for  the  resumption  of  Parliamentary 
work,  and  also  provided  for  requesting  a  Venice  Commission  opinion  on  the  Parliament’s 

78   Council of Europe, Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists (2025). 
79   Montenegro has replied to one alert. 
80    European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (2025). 
81   Montenegrin Government (2025), p. 145. Montenegro ratified the Council of Europe Convention on Access 

to Official Documents (CETS No. 205) (the Tromsø Convention) on 23 December 2012. 

82   Montenegrin Government (2025), p. 147. 
83   Montenegrin Government (2025), p. 148. 
84   Article  151  of  the  Rules  of  Procedure  of  the  Parliament  of  Montenegro  allows  for  laws  to  be  passed  by 
urgent  procedure,  especially  for  unforeseen  circumstances  or  harmonization  with  European  legislation. 
Article 152 outlines the procedures for proposing laws under urgent procedures, including the timeframe for 
submission  to  Parliament.  Article  153  specifies  the  parliamentary  process  for  considering  urgent  laws, 
allowing for immediate debate if necessary. 

85   Article 154(3) of the Constitution requires a  plenary decision of the Constitutional Court establishing the 
reasons for the termination of office. Such plenary decision was not delivered by the Constitutional Court 
before  the decision  of  the  Parliament  on  17  December.  Instead,  the  President  of  the  Constitutional  Court 
sent an informative letter to Parliament which outlined the facts regarding the retirement of the respective 
Constitutional Court judges. European Western Balkan (2025). 

86  Venice Commission (2025). 
87   Country visit Montenegro, Civil society organizations, EU Projects.   

13 

 
 
 
decision which was published on 16 June 2025. Despite these developments, the Parliament’s 
procedure for selecting a replacement of the concerned Constitutional Court judge continued.  

Over half of the companies surveyed in Montenegro express high levels of confidence in 
the effectiveness of investment protection88. 61% of companies are very or fairly confident 
that investments are protected by law and courts89. 41% perceive the level of independence of 
the  public  procurement  review  body  (Commission  for  the  Protection  of  Rights  in  Public 
Procurement Procedures) as very or fairly good90. 34% perceive the level of independence of 
the  national  competition  authority  (Agency  for  Protection  of  the  Competition)  as  very  or 
fairly good91. 

On  1  January  2025,  Montenegro  had  6  leading  judgments  of  the  European  Court  of 
Human  Rights  pending  implementation,  an  increase  of  3  compared  to  the  previous 
year92. On 1 January 2025, Montenegro’s rate of leading judgments from  the past 10 years 
that had been implemented was at 75% (compared to 86% in 2024; 25% remained pending), 
and the average time that the judgments had been pending implementation was 3 years and 3 
months  (compared  to  4  years  and  10  months  in  2024)93.  The  oldest  leading  judgment, 
pending implementation for 9 years, concerns ill- treatment in police detention and the lack 
of an effective investigation into the relevant complaints94. As regards the respect of payment 
deadlines,  on  31  December  2024  there  were  4  cases  in  total  awaiting  confirmation  of 
payments  (compared  to  1  in  2023)95.  On  16  June  2025,  the  number  of  leading  judgments 
pending implementation had remained 696.  

A new law on the Ombudsperson’s Office is being drafted to fully align with the Paris 
Principles  aimed  at  achieving  an  upgraded  accreditation  to  ‘A’  status.  The 
Ombudsperson  is  the  National  Human  Rights  Institution  and  is  accredited  with  B-status97. 
The  Government  is  preparing  a  new  law  aimed  at  fully  aligning  the  regulatory  and 
institutional  framework  with  the  principles  relating  to  the  Status  of  National  Institutions 
(Paris  Principles)  in  view  of  upgrading  the  accreditation  to  A-status.  The  Ombudsperson’s 
Office has made further progress in handling complaints, completing 89% of cases in 2024 
and  issuing  451  recommendations  in  236  cases98.  However,  the  Office  reports  that  the 
implementation of these recommendations remains a significant challenge99. The Office has 
observed  that  recommendations  backed  by  international  obligations  are  more  likely  to  be 

88   The level of perceived investment protection is categorised as follows: very low (below 30% of respondents 
fairly  and  very  confident  that  investments  are  protected  by  laws  and  courts);  low  (between  30-39%), 
average  (between  40-59%),  high  (between  60-75%),  very  high  (above  75%).  The  same  categories 
analogously apply to the perception of independence of procurement and competition authorities.  

89   Flash  Eurobarometer  555 (2025).  Only  13%  and  13% of  the  surveyed  investors  respectively  perceive  the 
frequent  changes  in  legislation  or  concerns  about  the  quality  of  the  law-making  process  and  the  quality, 
efficiency or independence of justice as a reason for the lack of confidence in investment protection. 

90   Flash Eurobarometer 555 (2025). 
91   Flash Eurobarometer 555 (2025). 
92   For an explanation of the supervision process, see the website of the Council of Europe.   
93   All figures calculated by the European Implementation Network (EIN) and based on the number of cases 

that are considered pending at the annual cut-off date of 1 January 2025. EIN (2025), p. 2. 

94   Judgment of the ECtHR, 1451/10, Sinistaj and Others v. Montenegro, pending implementation since 2015.  
95   Council of Europe (2025), p. 157.  
96   Data according to the online database of the Council of Europe (HUDOC). 
97   Accreditation by the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI). 
98   In  terms  of  recommendations  in  2024,132  are  pending,  111  are  being  implemented,  29  were  partially 

complied with, 79 were not implemented, and 100 were complied with. 

99   Country visit Montenegro, Ombudsperson’s Office. 

14 

 
 
 
implemented.  Stakeholders  referred  to  lack  of  financial  and  staffing  autonomy  as  main 
obstacles100. The Office has identified most rights violations, particularly in areas such as the 
prohibition  of  discrimination,  the  rights  of  the  child,  the  right  to  good  administration  and 
legal  protection,  the  rights  of  persons  deprived  of  their  liberty,  and  the  right  to  work  and 
employment law101. 

Civil  society  organisations  function  within  an  overall  enabling  environment,  while 
several challenges persist. Montenegro’s civil society landscape remains narrowed102, with 
stakeholders noting a limited space for civil society organisations to operate effectively and a 
the  Government  and  civil  society103.  While 
lack  of  structured  dialogue  between 
representatives from civil society organisations were systematically included in the working 
groups drafting laws and public policies, some stakeholders consider that more civil society 
organisations should be involved to ensure more diversity in the perspectives represented104. 
The 2022-2026 Strategy for cooperation between state administration bodies and civil society 
organisations continues to be implemented105. However, stakeholders perceive the impact of 
the  Strategy’s  activities  on  public  funding  as  inadequate,  with  some  civil  society 
organisations  facing  challenges  in  accessing  funding  for  their  projects.  The  lack  of 
transparency  and  accountability  in  public  funding  has  also  been  raised,  with  some 
organisations being concerned by a perceived lack of clear and accessible information about 
funding opportunities and the allocation of resources106. Not all ministries launched calls for 
proposals  to  finance  civil  society  projects,  as  required  by  the  Law  on  Non-Governmental 
Organisations, and challenges persist on strengthening their capacities for strategic planning, 
monitoring  and  evaluation  of  support  provided  to  civil  society  organisations.  Furthermore, 
the Council for Cooperation between the Government and civil society organisations did not 
meet despite having been re-established in February 2025. No cases of SLAPP against civil 
society organisations have been reported. 

100   Country visit Montenegro, Ombudsperson’s Office.  
101   Ombudsperson’s Office (2024). 
102   CIVICUS  (2025).  Ratings  are  on  a  five-category  scale  defined  as:  open,  narrowed,  obstructed,  repressed 

and closed.   

103   Country visit Montenegro, Civil society organisations. 
104   Country visit Montenegro, Civil society organisations.  
105   Montenegrin Government (2025), p. 146. 
106   Country visit Montenegro, civil society organisations. 

15 

 
 
 
 
Annex I: List of sources in alphabetical order* 

* The list of contributions received in the context of the consultation for the 2025 Rule of Law report 
can 
https://commission.europa.eu/publications/2025-rule-law-report-targeted-
found 
stakeholder-consultation_en . 

be 

at 

Agency for Personal  Data Protection and Free Access  to  Information (2024), Press  Release 
23 December 2024, https://www.azlp.me/me/pocetna?page=2.  

Agency  for  Prevention  of  Corruption  of  Montenegro  (2025),  Report  on  the  work  of  ACA 
2024, 
https://www.antikorupcija.me/media/documents/Izvje%C5%A1taj_o_radu_ASK_u_2024._g
odini.pdf.  

BalkanInsight (2024), Montenegro Elects New Supreme Court President After Long Delay,, 
https://balkaninsight.com/2024/11/29/montenegro-elects-new-supreme-court-president-after-
long-delay/.  

(2024),  Dashboard  Western 

CEPEJ 
https://www.coe.int/en/web/cepej/towards-a-better-evaluation-of-the-results-of-judicial-
reforms-in-the-western-balkans-dashboard-western-balkans-. 

Balkans 

2023  Data  Collection, 

– 

CIVICUS (2025), https://monitor.civicus.org/country/montenegro/. 

Consultative  Council  of  European  Judges  (2008),  Opinion  on  the  quality  of  Judicial 
Decisions, Opinion no. 11. 

Council  of  Europe:  Committee  of  Ministers  (2010),Recommendation  of  the  Committee  of 
Ministers of the Council of Europe on judges: independence, efficiency and responsibilities, 
(CM/Rec(2010)12). 

Council of Europe: Committee of Ministers (2025), Supervision of the execution of judgments 
and decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, 18th Annual Report of the Committee 
of Ministers, https://rm.coe.int/gbr-2001-18e-rapport-annuel-2024/1680b4d77d. 

Council  of  Europe:  European  Committee  for  the  Prevention  of  Torture  and  Inhuman  or 
Degrading Treatment or Punishment (2022), Report to the Government of Montenegro on the 
ad hoc visit to Montenegro from 7 to 13 June 2022, https://rm.coe.int/1680abb132.  

Council of Europe (2025), Baseline Evaluation Report on the implementation of the Council 
of Europe Convention on access to official documents, https://rm.coe.int/baseline-evaluation-
report-montenegro/1680b0f65d.  

Council of Europe: Venice Commission (2022), Opinion on the draft amendments to the Law 
on  the  Judicial  Council  and  Judges,  (CDL-AD(2022)050).Council  of  Europe:  Venice 
Commission (2023), Follow-up Opinion to the opinion on the draft amendments to the Law 
on the Judicial Council and Judges (CDL-AD(2023)011). 

Council of Europe: Venice Commission (2023a), Opinion on the Law on the Judicial Council 
and Judges with revised draft amendments (CDL-REF(2023)016). 

16 

 
 
Council of Europe: Venice Commission (2024), Urgent Follow-up Opinion to the Opinions 
on the Law on the State Prosecution Service (CDL-PI(2024)012). 

Council of Europe:  Venice Commission  (2024a), Urgent  follow-up Opinion to  the  opinions 
on the Law on the Special State Prosecutor’s Office (CDL-AD(2024)014). 

Council  of  Europe:  Venice  Commission  (2025),  Opinion  on  some  questions  relating  to  the 
procedure  of  early  termination  of  the  mandate  of  Constitutional  Court  judges  due  to  age 
limits, (CDL-AD(2025)029). 

Council of Europe, Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists 
(2025), Montenegro, https://fom.coe.int/en/pays/detail/11709552.  

for 

Judicial  Council  and  Courts  presented 

EUD  Delegation  of  the  European  Union  to  Montenegro  (2024),  The  New  Communication 
Strategy 
community, 
https://www.eeas.europa.eu/delegations/montenegro/new-communication-strategy-judicial-
council-and-courts-presented-legal-
community_en#:~:text=The%20Communication%20strategy%20of%20the,key%20for%20e
nsuring%20that%20trust.  

legal 

to 

European Commission (2024), 2024 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law 
situation in Montenegro. 

European  Centre  for  Press  and  Media  Freedom  (2025),  Media  Freedom  Rapid  Response  – 
Montenegro, https://www.mfrr.eu/monitor/.  

European  Court  of  Human  Rights  (2025),  online  database,  https://www.echr.coe.int/hudoc-
database.  

European  Court  of  Human  Rights,  Sinistaj  and  Others  v.  Montenegro,  application  no. 
1451/10. 

European  Implementation  Network  (EIN),  written  contribution  for  the  2025  Rule  of  Law 
Report. 

to 

European  Western  Balkan  (2025),  Political  turmoil  over  Constitutional  Court  dispute:  A 
challenge 
path?, 
Montenegrin 
https://europeanwesternbalkans.com/2025/04/03/political-turmoil-over-constitutional-court-
dispute-a-challenge-to-the-montenegrin-eu-reform-
path/#:~:text=The%20dispute%20between%20the%20government,mandate%20terminated%
2C%20despite%20fierce%20opposition.  

reform 

EU 

the 

European  Union  -  Council  of  Europe  Horizontal  Facility  action  (2025),  5th  Steering 
Committee  Meeting  “Strengthening  accountability  of  the  judicial  system  and  enhancing 
protection  of  victims`  rights  in  Montenegro”,  https://www.coe.int/en/web/podgorica/-
/montenegro-steps-up-justice-reform-and-victims-protection. 

GRECO  (2010),  Third  evaluation  round  on  the  Evaluation  Report  on  Montenegro 
Incriminations, 
https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId
=09000016806c9747.  

17 

 
 
GRECO (2020), Fourth Evaluation Round on Corruption prevention in respect of members 
of parliament, judges and prosecutors, https://rm.coe.int/fourth-evaluation-round-corruption-
prevention-in-respect-of-members-of/16809a5bdd.  

(2024),  Fifth 

GRECO 
https://rm.coe.int/grecorc5-2024-10-final-eng-compliance-report-montenegro-
public/1680b1251b. 

evaluation  Round  Compliance  Report  Montenegro,  

Judicial Council (2024), Annual Report on the Work of the Judicial Council and the Overall 
Situation 
2024, 
https://sudovi.me/static//sdsv/doc/IZVJESTAJ_O_RADU_2024.pdf.  

Judiciary 

the 

for 

in 

Ministry of Justice (2024), First session of the Council for Monitoring the Implementation of 
the  Judicial  Reform  Strategy  2024-2027  (Održana  prva  sjednica  Savjeta  za  praćenje 
sprovođenja Strategije reforme pravosuđa 2024-2027 ), https://www.gov.me/clanak/odrzana-
prva-sjednica-savjeta-za-pracenje-sprovodenja-strategije-reforme-pravosuda-2024-2027. 

Montenegrin Government (2024), Strategy for the fight against corruption and its action plan 
(Strategija za borbu protiv korupcije 2024-2028), https://www.gov.me/dokumenta/097c4829-
b046-4d1a-b688-857b4e7c0138t.   

Montenegrin Government (2025), written input for the 2025 Rule of Law Report. 

Montenegrin Government (2025a), additional written contribution for the 2025 Rule of Law 
Report. 

Montenegrin  Government  (2025b),  2025-2028  Judicial  Digitalisation  Strategy    (  Strategija 
Digitalizacije Pravosuđa 2025-2028), https://www.gov.me/dokumenta/595fb18b-6cc2-4d00-
8e24-c34d3bf894b0.  

Montenegrin  Government  (2025c),  2025-2026  Action  plan  for  the  implementation  of  the 
Judicial  Digitalization  Strategy  2025-2028  (Akcioni  Plan  za  sprovođenje  Strategije 
Digitalizacije 
godine), 
za 
2025-2028 
https://www.gov.me/dokumenta/b33d7d6c-d186-4e6d-a34c-a36080842285. 

Pravosuđa 

period 

2026. 

2025 

- 

Ombudsperson’s 
https://www.ombudsman.co.me/docs/1744199272_izvjestaj%2031-03-2025.pdf . 

(2024), 

Annual 

Report 

Office 

2024, 

OSCE (2023), Montenegro presidential election 19 March and 2 April 2023 ODIHR Election 
Obeservation 
Report, 
https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/4/8/560259_0.pdf. 

Mission 

Final 

State Audit Institution (2025), written contribution for the 2025 Rule of Law Report. 

Transparency  International  (2025),  Corruption  Perceptions  Index  2024,  Corruption 
Perceptions Index 2024 - Transparency.org.  

18 

 
 
Annex II: Country visit to Montenegro  

The Commission services held hybrid meetings in March 2025 with: 

•  Agency for Electronic Media 
•  Agency for Prevention of Corruption 
•  Association of Judges 
•  Association of Prosecutors 
•  Association of Professional Journalists 
•  Association of Youth with Disabilities in Montenegro 
•  Centre for Civic Education  
•  Center for Democracy and Human Rights 
•  Civic Alliance 
•  Constitutional Court 
•  Council of Europe 
•  European Union support to the Rule of Law IV (EUROL IV) 
•  Help – Hilfe zur Selbsthilfe Montenegro 
•  High Court 
•  Human Rights Action 
• 
Institut Alternativa 
•  Judicial Council  
•  Media Centre 
•  Media Institute 
•  Media Self-Regulation Council 
•  Montenegrin Bar Association 
•  Network for Affirmation of Non-Governmental Sector 
•  Ombudsman 
•  Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe 
•  Parliamentary Constitutional Committee 
•  Police specialised department for corruption and unit for financial investigation 
•  Prosecutorial Council  
•  Special State Prosecutor’s Office 
•  State Prosecutor’s Office 
•  Supreme Court 
•  Trade Union of Media of Montenegro 
•  Queer Montenegro 
•  Women’s Right Centre 

* The Commission also met the following organisations in a number of horizontal meetings:  

•  Amnesty International 
•  Araminta 
•  Civil Liberties Union for Europe 
•  Civil Society Europe 
•  European Civic Forum 
•  European Partnership for Democracy 

19 

 
 
 
International Commission of Jurists 
International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) 

•  European Youth Forum, 
• 
• 
•  JEF Europe 
•  Philea – Philanthropy Europe Association. 
•  Transparency International  

20