In a rapid session that lasted just 87 minutes, the Parliament of Montenegro approved 25 laws, accompanied by a staggering 4,457 pages of documentation. The decision to forego detailed discussion of these laws has raised significant concerns about the degradation of parliamentary democracy, according to Milena Gvozdenović, Deputy Executive Director of the Centre for Democratic Transition (CDT).
Gvozdenović noted that this practice, described as a “lack of discussion,” further deepens the ongoing dilemma surrounding whether parliamentarians have genuinely reviewed the laws before voting. During the first extraordinary session, 20 laws proposed by the government were adopted in just 1 hour and 11 minutes, which included remarks from the Minister for European Affairs and three opposition members. The second session was even more expedited, lasting only 16 minutes to pass an additional five laws proposed by members of parliament.
Despite the assertion from the Minister for European Affairs that these laws are crucial for European integration, Gvozdenović highlighted the troubling reality that many parliamentarians considered them unimportant enough to bypass serious debate. Among the significant laws passed without discussion were the Law on Medicines, comprising 360 articles, and the Law on Consumer Protection, which alone has 435 pages of supporting materials. Additionally, the Law on Capital Markets saw 32 government amendments submitted just two days before the session.
Gvozdenović criticized this approach, indicating that it has become the modus operandi of the current parliament, particularly since the passage of the so-called IBAR laws. She pointed out that negative experiences with amendments to key legislation, such as the Law on Preventing Corruption and the Law on Political Financing, have not served as sufficient warnings to the government and parliament.
She emphasized that laws should be prepared transparently and inclusively, reflecting the standards expected in democratic societies. While some members of parliament may view the rapid adoption of laws as a bureaucratic achievement, Gvozdenović asserted that their primary responsibility should be to enable public discourse on legislation that impacts citizens’ lives.
Gvozdenović argued that for the citizens, no law is trivial. She stressed that European integration cannot be an excuse for passing legislation at a pace of approximately four minutes per law, devoid of public engagement and consideration of expert opinions. She concluded by emphasizing that transparent and inclusive legislative processes are fundamental principles of European democracy. If the parliament genuinely aimed to act in accordance with European standards, laws would first be thoroughly reviewed and discussed, with their implications clearly communicated to the public.
