N13.T10 – Statute of Limitations and Dismissal of Criminal Complaints in Prosecution Offices and Courts – Inefficiency or Something More Serious?
HRA NEWSLETTER 13 – TOPIC 10
In Montenegrin prosecution offices, more than three thousand criminal complaints against known and unknown perpetrators have been dismissed over the past three years, according to the report of the Prosecutorial Council. Out of 399 complaints dismissed due to the statute of limitations on criminal prosecution in 2022, 2023, and 2024, as many as 186 came from the Special State Prosecutor’s Office (SSP).The Center for Investigative Journalism reports that the total number of such cases before the courts remains unknown, since last year only seven basic courts submitted data to the Judicial Council.
“These results clearly show that serious and socially harmful cases have not been prosecuted within the legally prescribed time limits, leading to the impossibility of criminal prosecution and punishment of offenders,” warned Amra Bajrović from Human Rights Action (HRA).
“In other words, the state has failed to fulfill its function and is effectively promoting impunity,” Bajrović added.
During 2024, the Prosecutorial Council discussed reports from basic prosecution offices on cases against unknown perpetrators. The Council Secretariat found that 2,208 cases had become time-barred in Montenegro’s prosecution offices, of which 1,958 (around 90%) were in the Basic State Prosecutor’s Office in Podgorica. Human Rights Action called on the authorities to establish accountability for such a high number of expired cases.
“However, to this day, not a single state prosecutor, head of a prosecution office, or acting head has been held responsible for allowing cases to lapse,” Bajrović emphasized.
According to HRA, failure to act in such cases may amount to professional negligence or a serious disciplinary offense, and could even constitute a criminal act.
Last year, nearly all complaints against unknown perpetrators were dismissed due to the statute of limitations — out of 1,400 criminal complaints, 1,334 were dismissed, and in the past three years, more than 70% of such complaints were never prosecuted.
Bajrović noted that these figures confirm the persistent inefficiency in the work of the prosecution.
Regulations stipulate that prosecutors may face disciplinary responsibility if they fail to act in at least two cases without a justified reason, resulting in the statute of limitations. However, judges are not subject to disciplinary proceedings for allowing cases to lapse.
Currently, it is not known how many cases expire before Montenegrin courts, as the Judicial Council does not have complete data. For 2024, data exists only for seven basic courts (Podgorica, Nikšić, Berane, Bijelo Polje, Pljevlja, Plav, and Ulcinj), showing that nine cases and 21 enforcement proceedings became time-barred during the year.
“Such fragmented data from the Judicial Council conceal the true scale of the problem — including potential corruption. It is therefore crucial that a comprehensive record be established across all courts and made a regular part of judicial reporting,” urged HRA, which has for years called for the mandatory collection and publication of statistics on all expired cases and their causes.
Although the Prosecutorial Council in 2024 adopted a Methodology for Preparing the Annual Reports of the Council and the State Prosecutor’s Offices, which includes the collection of data on expired cases, the Judicial Council has yet to do so. The 2014 Instruction on Court Reporting remains in force, which does not require the collection or submission of such data — meaning that courts are not obliged to provide this information to the Judicial Council.
“The courts and the Judicial Council should ensure that the availability of such data becomes standard practice, while also taking all necessary steps to establish responsibility in cases where the statute of limitations has occurred,” HRA stated.
Human Rights Action had already in 2017 proposed that the reasons for the statute of limitations in every case be systematically reviewed, and that commissions determine whether a judge or prosecutor bears responsibility.
The situation is particularly troubling in high-profile cases involving top Montenegrin officials, where prosecutions have expired — such as the ‘Telekom’ case involving Milo Đukanović, parts of the indictment against Judge Danilo Jegdić, the case against former Budva Mayor Marko Carević, and proceedings involving Svetozar Marović and Petar Ivanović, former DPS officials.
English