loading . . . How Montenegro secured key constitutional agreement for EU advancement The authorities and almost the entire parliamentary opposition in Montenegro reached an agreement last week on amending the Constitution, with EU mediation, in order to ensure the country’s further progress on the European path. The only party that did not support the agreement was the Democratic People’s Party, led by Milan Knežević, a politician close to Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić. The Serbian president recently attacked the parties of the ruling majority, primarily Parliament Speaker Andrija Mandić – whom he accused of “anti-Serb activities” – because of their acceptance of amendments that do not include Serbian as an official language in the Constitution.
Montenegro parties commit to constitutional and electoral reforms for faster EU integration
Changing the Constitution requires a two-thirds majority in parliament, i.e., 54 out of the total 81 MPs. The ruling majority holds 47 seats, meaning it lacked at least seven votes. For that reason, it had to accept a number of demands from the opposition concerning the security sector, electoral legislation, parliamentary oversight, and appointments in the judiciary. On the opposition side, the constitutional amendments were supported by the Democratic Party of Socialists, which has 17 representatives in parliament, and the European Alliance, with three representatives.
Agreement
The agreement was reached on 6 July at a meeting hosted by the head of the European Union Delegation to Montenegro, Johann Sattler. Its aim is to lift the political blockade that could have jeopardized the closing of negotiating chapters 23 and 17 in Montenegro’s EU accession talks. The signatories pledged to support the constitutional amendments and other decisions requiring a qualified majority in parliament, with a deadline of 4 September for completing all procedures. They quickly demonstrated their seriousness: the very next day, on 7 July, parliament launched the procedure for amending the Montenegrin Constitution with 74 votes in favor and three against.
The deputies of Knežević’s pro-Serbian party were the only ones to vote against. “We did not all agree and did not all vote, because that would be groupthink. We are not in North Korea,” Knežević explained in his characteristic manner. In contrast, opposition European Alliance MP Boris Mugoša did not hide his satisfaction: “When an agreement that empowers the state’s European path is reached, there are no defeated parties. Montenegro has won. Its citizens have won. Its European future has won,” said Mugoša.
Amendments
The official confirmation of the agreement is the Political Agreement on Overcoming the Parliamentary Crisis in the Key Phase of Montenegro’s European Integration Process. The document states that the Law on Internal Affairs will be amended by the end of July, particularly regarding the procedure for forming and the composition of the Commission for checking security obstacles for employees at the Ministry of the Interior and the Police Directorate. By the same deadline, amendments to the Law on the National Security Agency are to be adopted, introducing stronger mechanisms of judicial control over the Agency’s work. These were controversial provisions through which the authorities sought to establish additional control over the security sector.
According to the published details, the Commission for checking security obstacles will no longer be formed independently by the interior minister, but by the government at the minister’s proposal and with the prior opinion of the parliamentary Security and Defence Committee. Regarding the Law on the National Security Agency, the parties agreed to strengthen judicial oversight of the Agency’s work, especially over measures and actions that may affect citizens’ rights.
The agreement also envisages the immediate intensification of efforts to elect two judges of the Constitutional Court nominated by the Montenegrin president. Analysts note that filling vacancies does not automatically mean Montenegro will obtain an independent and depoliticized Constitutional Court. The key issue is not whether the judges will be elected, but whether their election will be based on expertise and integrity or on a party deal for dividing influence.
Somewhat surprisingly, the political agreement between the authorities and the opposition also provides for continued work on the long-initiated – and in the meantime largely forgotten – reform of electoral legislation. Amendments to the Constitution aimed at boosting the independence of the judiciary and the central bank are also planned.
The opposition, primarily the Democratic Party of Socialists and its partners, was generally not against the judicial constitutional reforms. The opposition parties conditioned their support on the withdrawal or correction of controversial solutions in the laws on the police and the National Security Agency, on an agreement regarding electoral conditions, and on greater opposition involvement in parliamentary oversight. In this way, the opposition used the constitutional amendments as a negotiating lever, since without its votes the authorities could not have secured the required majority.
On 9 July parliament determined the draft amendments. This was followed by a public debate lasting at least one month, during which the opinion of the Venice Commission will also be obtained – a request from the opposition that the Constitutional Committee accepted. After the public hearing, the Constitutional Committee will review the objections and prepare the final draft of the constitutional amendments and the constitutional law for their implementation. Parliament will then vote once again on the final text. The political agreement sets 4 September as the deadline for adopting the constitutional amendments.
Mandić and Knežević
Knežević’s Democratic People’s Party, the Socialist People’s Party, and some other politicians are using the debate to once again raise the issues of the Serbian language and the tricolor flag, even though these are not part of the constitutional changes. Knežević’s party, which opposes amending the Constitution, maintains hardline and recognizable political positions, which secures it stable support from an ideologically profiled electorate. By refusing to support the constitutional changes without first resolving the status of the Serbian language, Knežević confirmed that he places identity issues ahead of judicial reform and European obligations. This approach may strengthen the party’s voter base in the short term, but it reduces its coalition potential.
Unlike Knežević, his former coalition partner Andrija Mandić, leader of the New Serb Democracy, employs more moderate European rhetoric. This may be politically useful for both, as it allows them to appeal to different segments of their once-common electorate. While Mandić’s party seeks to present itself as more institutionally responsible and acceptable to European partners, Knežević’s party holds to a tougher national and identity-based policy. Nevertheless, one cannot rule out the possibility that the original division of roles has over time developed into a genuine clash of interests.
Mandić’s more moderate rhetoric is also viewed as an adaptation to European expectations, but a change in presentation does not necessarily mean a fundamental change in policy. His avoidance of certain gatherings in Belgrade (Mandić did not attend the recent conference of parliament speakers of EU candidate countries organized by Vučić) can be seen as an attempt to balance between his state office in Montenegro and earlier political connections with the Serbian authorities.
Still, the fact that relations have changed is clearly indicated by Vučić’s harsh accusations that all who support amendments to the Montenegrin Constitution are “extremely anti-Serb oriented.” Unhappy that the Serbian language and the tricolor flag were not included in the constitutional amendments, Vučić praises Knežević while directing most of his anger at Mandić. Referring to Mandić, Vučić said last week that some in Montenegro, who until two years ago “declared themselves Serbs” and asked him for all kinds of help, “are no longer Serbs.”
Cabinet reshuffle
The constitutional amendments are accompanied by the announcement of a new, third reshuffle of Spajić’s cabinet, which, according to media reports, could be completed by the end of July. It is expected that the reshuffle will primarily fill the vacancies created after Knežević’s party left the ruling majority earlier this year, rather than bringing opposition parties into the executive. Knežević withdrew support from Spajić’s government due to the lack of agreement on his party’s initiatives regarding the status of the Serbian language, citizenship, the tricolor flag, and other identity issues.
Mandić’s New Serb Democracy, which has remained in the ruling coalition, could now gain greater influence in the cabinet. For this reason, the reshuffle is not merely a staffing issue but also a test of the relations between Mandić and Knežević, as well as of the stability of the overall parliamentary majority.
Despite the departure of Knežević’s party, the government faces no majority problems. Nevertheless, any new distribution of departments requires harmonizing the partners’ differing interests at a time when Montenegro is striving to accelerate the closure of negotiating chapters with the EU. Spajić presents the reshuffle as an instrument for aligning the government’s work with European obligations, while critics argue that frequent changes point to complex relations within the broad ruling coalition.
The original version of this article titled “Knezevic vs everybody” by EUalive’s partner Beta can be found here .
Caption: The President of Montenegro Jakov Milatovic addresses the European Parliament in Strasbourg, France, 16 June 2026. EPA/OLIVIER MATTHYS https://eualive.net/how-montenegro-secured-key-constitutional-agreement-for-eu-advancement/
