HRA NEWSLETTER 1 – TOPIC 6

The Law on the Constitutional Court of Montenegro requires the Court to notify the proponent (the National Assembly and President of State) six months in advance when a judge qualifies for retirement. Before doing so, the Court must first determine in a session that “the conditions for the termination of office have been fulfilled.”

In a response submitted to Human Rights Action by the president of the Constitutional Court, Snežana Armenko, it was revealed that at the session held on June 27, 2024, “an agreement was not reached regarding the proposal to establish the fulfilment of conditions for the termination of judicial office for a judge who is set to turn 65 in December of this year; two judges supported the proposal, while four were opposed.” Armenko concluded that she lacked the constitutionally mandated majority needed to inform the Assembly of Montenegro regarding this matter.

Additionally, Armenko confirmed that the proponents had not been informed about the fulfilment of termination conditions for two other judges, whose reasons for termination arose before she assumed her position as head of the Court.

In response to these developments, Human Rights Action (HRA) and the Centre for Democratic Transition (CDT) questioned whether the Constitutional Court operates as an institution grounded in the Constitution and the law.

“It is particularly scandalous that two directly interested judges were not recused from decision-making, allowing them to decide in their own case, which presents a clear conflict of interest regarding the timing of their office termination. This is contrary to the principle of nemo iudex in causa sua, which is binding even for the Constitutional Court of Montenegro under the current law,” stated the HRA and CDT in a press release.

They pointed out that “only certain judges of the Constitutional Court seem to be insisting on extending their terms, leveraging the situation to impose their decisions as standard practice,” unlike other judges in regular courts, whose terms conclude according to the Law on Pension and Disability Insurance.

The HRA and CDT reminded the public that a fundamental requirement for Montenegro’s accession to the European Union is the existence of institutions capable of upholding the rule of law, asserting that “the Constitutional Court is not such an institution.”

HRA NEWSLETTER 1

• N1.T1 – High Court Judges in Podgorica Appeal: Current Number of Judges Insufficient to Address Case Backlog
• N1.T2 – Ninth Attempt to Elect the President of the Supreme Court of Montenegro
• N1.T3 – Vesna Medenica in Court Proceedings: Hearings Delayed 23 Times Across Two Criminal Cases
• N1.T4 – CEPEJ Shows Significantly Reduced Efficiency of the Montenegrin Judiciary
• N1.T5 – Judges Declare November Work Stoppage in Demand for Higher Salaries
• N1.T6 – Constitutional Court Fails to Notify Montenegro’s National Assembly of Judges’ Terminations, Ignoring Statutory Obligation
• N1.T7 – Inertness of the Judicial Council Is Threatening the Transparency and Independence of the Judiciary