The Human Rights Action (HRA) has submitted initiatives to the competent authorities to determine the responsibility of the judge of the Basic Court in Berane, the head of the Basic State Prosecutor’s Office in Berane and police officers and the head of the Berane Security Department, in order to analyze their actions and establish the reasons why the illegal installation of the monument was not prevented, and why it has not been confiscated as an object of a criminal offense for three months.

Two initiatives were submitted to examine violations of the Ethical Code for judges and state prosecutors, while a third was submitted to examine disciplinary ommissions on the part of the head and police officers.

Since the statements of the Basic State Prosecutor’s Office in Berane and the Police Directorate are contradictory regarding the timing when the competent prosecutor’s office issued the order to confiscate the monument, we expect the competent authorities to establish the chronology of events and the ommissions of officials who were obligated to effectively ensure the enforcement of the law.

An initiative has been submitted to the Commission for the Ethical Code of State Prosecutors against the head of the Basic State Prosecutor’s Office in Berane, to determine whether, if the statements of the Police Directorate are accurate, the delayed issuance of the order for the confiscation of the monument violated the obligation under the Ethical Code of State Prosecutors to act professionally, conscientiously, without delay, and to ensure effective and functional cooperation with the police.

A complaint has been submitted to the Department for Internal Police Control regarding the conduct of police officers and the head of the Berane Security Department, due to suspicion that they did not act on the prosecutor’s orders and did not independently take measures to secure the object of the criminal offense. If it is established that all orders existed, and that the police did not act promptly and effectively, such behavior would constitute a serious breach of official duty under Article 173, paragraph 1, point 7 of the Law on Internal Affairs and Article 95, paragraph 1, point 1 of the Law on Civil Servants and Employees.

The third initiative was submitted to the Commission for the Ethical Code of Judges regarding the judge of the Basic Court in Berane, due to suspicion that by repeatedly rejecting the proposals of the Basic State Prosecutor’s Office in Berane for the temporary confiscation of the monument, despite the decisions of panels that overturned her rulings, she acted contrary to the principles of professionalism, conscientiousness, and impartiality prescribed by the Ethical Code of Judges.

We recall that on August 7, 2025, in the village of Gornje Zaostro in Berane, a monument to Pavle Đurišić was erected on the private property of Vujadin Dobrašinović, and later moved to the Đurđevi Stupovi Monastery. The prosecutor’s office qualified the installation of the monument to the World War II war criminal, who had been decorated by Hitler, as the criminal offense of damaging and unlawfully erecting a commemorative monument. A group of NGOs, including HRA, appealed to the Supreme State Prosecutor to classify the act also as incitement of national, racial, and religious hatred and provided additional arguments in support.

We consider it unacceptable that state authorities did not prevent the erection of the monument, even though they had been timely informed of the intention to install it, and that this monument, as the object of a criminal offense, has been out of reach of the competent authorities for three months.

The fact that state authorities present contradictory statements regarding the circumstances of the case deepens the suspicion about the legality of their actions and points to failures in coordination.

Such ommissions undermine the principle of legality, erode citizens’ trust in institutions, and call into question the rule of law in Montenegro.

We call on the competent authorities to promptly examine all allegations, determine the responsibility of the participants, and inform the public of the results of the proceedings.

We hope that Montenegrin institutions will in the future strengthen themselves sufficiently to conduct appropriate procedures and determine ommissions in such cases independently, without external initiatives, to prevent their recurrence.