By Author: Željka Mirković – Nova M
The story of whistleblowers, those who stand up for the public interest, is always a story of courage and responsibility. In Montenegro, however, it is also a stark reminder of systemic failures that continue to leave them exposed and unprotected.
Patricija Pobrić was never officially recognized as a whistleblower: during the Ramada affair, Montenegro’s Agency for the Prevention of Corruption declined to grant her that status. Yet, years later, she has no second thoughts.
“Of course, I wouldn’t change a thing. It wasn’t a spur‑of‑the‑moment decision; it was an ethical one, and there’s no debate about that. I would do it all over again. I have no doubts about reporting or about speaking out against corruption. That still needs to be done,” Pobrić told Nova M.
Laws on Paper, Protection in Limbo
Montenegro has the legal framework to protect whistleblowers, says Drago Kos, an independent anti‑corruption expert. But, he warns, laws alone are not enough.
“The biggest challenge is encouraging people to speak up. And once they do, the question is whether there is a system in place that truly protects them. Protection is not only about legal work—filing and defending cases—but also about very practical steps: where and how to keep these people safe,” Kos explained.
Photo: OSCE
Civil society groups point to recent amendments to Montenegro’s Law on Prevention of Corruption, which partially address whistleblower protection. Yet, according to Zorana Marković of CRNVO, gaps remain:
“A new law is currently being drafted that will deal exclusively with whistleblower protection. We hope this will finally be the moment, in line with promises from the authorities, to regulate this area in a better and more effective way,” Marković said.
Kos, however, cautions against plans to leave protection entirely in the hands of the courts:
“I don’t think it’s wise to rely solely on the courts. They have a specific role, while protecting whistleblowers is often a matter of practical measures,” he said.
Institutional Silence
For Pobrić, the lack of engagement from institutions is just as troubling:
“In the last three or four years, nothing has happened. There’s no one to report to. There’s no position, no opposition. Institutions practically don’t exist anymore,” she said.
Photo: PR Centar
When Nova M sought comment from the Police Administration last month, they were told no spokesperson could be provided because the identities of officers working on these cases are confidential. The responses they did receive were minimal, and the Special State Prosecutor’s Office offered no reply at all.
“At present, and in the recent past, there has not been a single individual with whistleblower status included in the witness protection program,” the Police Administration stated in writing.
Absurd but Fixable Contradictions
Kos highlights absurd contradictions in practice, such as the case of attorney Mladen Tomović. He serves on the council of Montenegro’s anti‑corruption agency, yet has also represented clients prosecuting whistleblowers.
“Strictly speaking, he’s not in a conflict of interest because, as a member of the council, he doesn’t perform operational tasks for the agency. But that doesn’t make it right. In fact, I think it’s far worse. No law I know allows this, but under current practice, a member of an anti‑corruption body tasked with protecting whistleblowers can simultaneously act as a lawyer prosecuting them,” Kos said.
A System Should Protect the Brave
Montenegro’s new whistleblower protection law has only recently come into force, so it is too early to assess its impact. But previous mechanisms have been far from adequate, says Marković:
“Looking at past cases—those we know about because the people involved were brave enough to go public—most were not satisfied with the protection they received. And that’s without even mentioning the assistance they might have needed to defend their rights and interests,” she said.
Photo: PR Centar
However, in the end, no system can entirely suppress those who refuse to stay silent.
“It’s a matter of character—you either have it, or you don’t,” Pobrić concluded.
This article was produced as part of the project “Open Trials – Monitoring High‑Level Corruption and Organized Crime Cases,” implemented by the Center for Monitoring and Research (CeMI) and the Media Union of Montenegro, with the support of the Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. The views expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the donor.
