By “Obvious obstructions in appointing members of managing bodies and councils, such as the failure to announce or the annulment of public calls, burden Montenegro’s process of joining the European Union, and the reasons for resorting to such practices remain unclear,” said Professor Dr. Aneta Spaić, Dean of the Faculty of Law at the University of Montenegro.
She was commenting on the now two annulled public calls for the selection of missing members of the Council of the Agency for Audiovisual Media Services (AMU), issued and annulled by the President of the Montenegrin Parliament, Andrija Mandić. The AMU Council has been missing two members since December last year, and the process should have long been completed. Additionally, a call for three members of the Council of the national broadcaster RTCG was due to be issued on February 11, but both procedures are on hold.
“This is clearly an abuse. What exactly is trying to be prevented, and why new members are not being appointed, remains unclear. But it is clear that such practices burden the accession process and ultimately undermine the goal of closing negotiation chapters—which can be reopened,” said Spaić.
Mandić annulled the first call due to an alleged technical error flagged by an NGO one day before the deadline—a point that many in the public deemed not to be an actual error. The second was annulled after the Parliament’s Administrative Committee later interpreted that candidates had not been nominated in line with procedural requirements. The affected candidates came from the NGO sector and the Montenegrin Academy of Sciences and Arts (CANU).
“I believe that, in the case of NGOs, this was the standard way they nominate their members. As for CANU, I know they followed the procedures prescribed by law and their internal regulations. The decision was made by the presidency, and there is no other way to appoint someone. So, this is clearly an evasion of both the process and its purpose,” Spaić stated firmly.
She noted that the intention to preserve the status quo is evident, especially in the case of the AMU Council. “This intention is clear because there was no need to annul the first call—and especially not now.”
“An appropriate measure by the European Commission (EC) would be to reopen Chapter 10 and thus demonstrate that undermining the accession process carries certain consequences,” she added.
Prevent Politicians from Choosing Council Members
She supports the current legal provision allowing NGO sector representatives in the AMU and RTCG councils to be selected within their own ranks, rather than by parliamentary committees composed of politicians—a proposal by some NGOs.
“It’s very problematic for members of the Administrative Committee to select and nominate candidates. That has previously allowed political parties to appoint their favorites. The current system is better because NGOs nominate their own candidates, and the criteria are quite strict. It’s good that the EC responded early and stated that solutions must be as far removed from political influence as possible, which is especially unacceptable when the process is already underway and has been arbitrarily disrupted—twice. In the future, we might re-evaluate this approach, but for now, it’s clearly a case of circumvention and avoidance. Moreover, the current law is more democratic than the proposed changes,” Spaić explained.
Lack of Transparency in Media Ownership Is a Major Problem
Discussing other media-related issues, Spaić emphasized concerns over foreign ownership. She pointed out that there is too much of it, coming from “a country in the region,” and that the current audiovisual media law fails to adequately address this issue. She also mentioned the EU Media Freedom Act (EMFA), which came into force mid-last year, and from which she expected more.
“It was expected that this EU law would provide a framework for reporting on ownership and media concentration and ensure an effective system for preventing harmful foreign influence,” Spaić said, noting that media ownership and concentration are rarely discussed publicly, and that the relevant legislation lacks precision—we don’t know who the ultimate owners are.
“I believe AMU intends to solve this issue, but they have yet to figure out how. Political support is also needed for this, as these decisions require backing from all key actors. Right now, it’s evident that the leading electronic media are entirely foreign owned. A different council structure might approach this issue differently,” she said, adding that she sees no other major issue in current media laws.
RTCG Law Criteria Were Clearly Tailored—Surprising That EC Didn’t Flag It
Regarding the public broadcaster, she criticized the reduction of criteria for the position of Director General—from 10 to 5 years of professional experience in the relevant educational level.
“I don’t know how we managed to get a positive opinion from the EC despite that provision. It was a clear case of tailoring criteria for a specific person, and it’s surprising that the EC didn’t recognize this as a problem. Their reports on the significance of public broadcasting are usually comprehensive. Everyone expected a clearer and more appropriate response from the EC to prevent the lowering of standards, but no such measures followed. These are critical pressure points in the media system that European partners must acknowledge,” Spaić said.
Commenting on the current situation at RTCG, she emphasized: “Respecting final court rulings is an imperative for any member of the Council of Europe—let alone a candidate country for EU membership. It is thus surprising that there is consensus in disregarding final court decisions and persistence in not implementing them.”
