Constitutional Court Determined to Reduce the Number of Pending Cases – Case Resolution Plan Adopted
The President of the Constitutional Court of Montenegro, Snežana Armenko, adopted a Plan and Programme for Case Resolution for 2026, which was presented to judges at a session of the Constitutional Court held on 16 January. The plan defines the manner of resolving cases in the fields of normative review and constitutional complaints. As of 1 January, the Court had 2,006 unresolved cases across all jurisdictions.
According to the plan, constitutional complaints will be decided by the Constitutional Court in the order of receipt, except for those assessed as priority cases. The ultimate goal is for the judges of the Constitutional Court to resolve 1,765 cases during 2026, excluding priority cases.
It is also planned that by the end of the year, 82 cases of normative review of regulations from 2018, 2019, 2020, and the first half of 2021 will be completed, as well as 25 cases from later years.
However, the plan is still not sufficiently precise to enable the public and participants in proceedings to track the exact timing of consideration of individual cases, nor does it contain data on priority cases, which have been recommendations of Human Rights Action since 2014.
The Constitutional Court announced that President Snežana Armenko will hold monthly meetings with reporting judges, the Secretary General, heads of departments, and constitutional advisers in order to ensure the timely implementation of the obligations under the Plan.
Proceedings Initiated Against Former Judge Rada Kovačević
The Basic State Prosecutor’s Office in Podgorica initiated proceedings against retired Supreme Court judge Rada Kovačević on suspicion that she gave false testimony in the proceedings against former President of the Supreme Court Vesna Medenica, her son Miloš, and other defendants.
“The case is currently in the preliminary investigation phase. In order to protect the interests of the proceedings, it is not possible at this time to provide further details,” the Basic State Prosecutor’s Office stated.
During her testimony before the High Court in Podgorica in October of last year, Kovačević claimed that she had never received a wristwatch as a gift from Medenica. However, messages read out in the courtroom during the proceedings cast doubt on her statement.
“The watch is beautiful, thank you once again. I am truly touched by the gesture. I sincerely hope that the case in question had no influence. This is far too expensive. You went too far; I have no way to reciprocate. My household jury likes it as well,” the correspondence between Kovačević and Vesna Medenica reads.
Two Judges Reinforce the Supreme Court
At its session held on 19 January, the Judicial Council established that judges Magdalena Zečević of the High Court in Podgorica and Nerma Dobardžić, Deputy Protector of Human Rights and Freedoms, were elected as judges of the Supreme Court of Montenegro.
With the election of Dobardžić, a special judicial position envisaged by the 2015 amendments to the Law on the Judicial Council and Judges was filled. This position is intended for a candidate with at least 20 years of experience in the judiciary, prosecution, legal practice, notarial service, academic legal work, or other legal professions. Due to a lack of interest, this position in the Supreme Court had remained vacant for more than a decade.
In addition to the Supreme Court, reinforcements were also provided to the Basic Courts in Podgorica, Nikšić, Bar, Bijelo Polje, and Pljevlja.
Judicial Council Published Decisions of the Disciplinary Panel and the Commission for Monitoring the Application of the Code of Judicial Ethics
At its third session, held on 27 January, the Judicial Council adopted the Rulebook on the anonymisation and pseudonymisation of data in decisions of the Judicial Council, which was a prerequisite for the final publication of decisions of the Disciplinary Panel and the Commission for Monitoring the Application of the Code of Judicial Ethics.
The NGO Human Rights Action welcomed the decision to publish the decisions of the Judicial Council on its official website.
“The publication of these decisions is of essential importance for monitoring the respect of professional standards in practice. This is important both for judges and for candidates for judicial office, in order to familiarize themselves with the practice of establishing responsibility and to receive clear guidance on unacceptable conduct and possible sanctions,” HRA stated.
They emphasized that the public is now enabled “to follow how disciplinary and ethical proceedings are conducted.”
“This is particularly important because the European Commission has emphasized in its opinions the need for their effective implementation, which also represents the final benchmark for Chapter 23.”
It is recalled that during 2025 the Judicial Council changed its practice and stopped publishing these decisions, which prompted Human Rights Action to repeatedly appeal for their public availability. The same issue was raised by MP Zoran Mikić at sessions of the Parliamentary Committee on the Political System, Judiciary, and Administration.
Fourteen Courts Await the Engagement of New Judicial Trainees
The Supreme Court of Montenegro announced a call for the engagement of 35 judicial trainees for a fixed term of three years, to be assigned to 14 courts.
The greatest number of trainees is needed by the Commercial Court (seven), the High Court in Podgorica (five), the Misdemeanour Court in Podgorica (four), and the High Court in Bijelo Polje (three).
The call, published on 13 January, states that “if two or more candidates on the ranking list have the same number of points, priority shall be given to a candidate who belongs to a minority people or other minority national community; if all candidates belong to a minority people or other minority national community, priority shall be given to the candidate with the higher grade point average upon graduation.”
Continuation of Trial for War Crime Against Defendant Gašović Scheduled for 26 February
The trial of Zoran Gašović, a Montenegrin citizen charged with crimes against humanity committed in Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1992, will continue before the High Court in Podgorica on 26 February.
At the first main hearing, held on 27 November 2025, the defendant denied guilt. He stated that during the relevant period he was a member of the reserve police force in Hadžići, but that he did not participate in the commission of the crime.
That hearing, however, was marked by a serious procedural omission in the treatment of 16 witnesses and injured parties who had travelled from Bosnia and Herzegovina. It was evident in the courtroom that none of them had been previously informed about the course of the proceedings, the manner of examination, or whether they could attend the reading of the indictment. All of these issues were addressed during the hearing itself, which caused unease and dissatisfaction.
As a result, on 12 December 2025, Human Rights Action (HRA) sent a letter to the President of the High Court in Podgorica, requesting the establishment of responsibility for the inappropriate treatment of victims and witnesses, as well as the urgent establishment of a witness support service. No response to this letter has yet been received.
English