Montenegro is hesitant to rehabilitate the prisoners from Goli Otok due to concerns that it may unearth uncomfortable truths regarding past party conflicts in the nation and the officials involved. There’s also apprehension that this legal process might inadvertently promote the radical ideologies held by some former prisoners.

This insight was shared with “Vijesti” by Nikola Zečević, a historian and senior researcher at the University of Montenegro’s Institute for Advanced Studies (UCG). He commented on the government’s reluctance to enact legislation for the rehabilitation and compensation of individuals imprisoned on Goli Otok, especially given the significant number of detainees from that camp compared to the overall population of the former Yugoslav republics.

The most recent call for action came on Wednesday from President Jakov Milatović, who urged parliament to pass a law addressing the issue. However, it appears unlikely that the rehabilitation of Goli Otok prisoners will advance in the near future, as Milatović’s proposal lacks sufficient political backing for a vote. Although there is partial support from some parliamentary factions, the initiative does not have the endorsement of the dominant ruling party, the Europe Now Movement (PES), nor does it enjoy the support of the majority of the opposition, meaning the law’s passage is improbable without their agreement.

This raises a critical question: why are Montenegrin authorities seemingly indifferent to the plight of Goli Otok victims, unlike many of their counterparts in the former Yugoslavia?

Zečević: Deep Divisions from Ideological Conflict

Zečević noted that various factors contribute to this, primarily the prolonged absence of political consensus and will. He pointed out that the former ruling Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS) found it impossible to reach an agreement on the legal rehabilitation of Goli Otok prisoners, as doing so would necessitate a critical examination of, and accountability for, the actions of previous communist officials who instigated the “party clashes,” some of whom or their descendants remain active in public life.

“Goli Otok is a contentious topic for some segments of the public, as it exposes a myriad of uncomfortable truths concerning the extent of ‘party conflicts’ in Montenegro. Such discussions are frequently viewed through the prism of ‘treason’ versus ‘loyalty,’ thereby creating a politically sensitive environment around this topic,” Zečević explained.

Conversely, he remarked that the ideological rift stemming from this conflict has entrenched deep divisions within Montenegro, fostering fears that enacting a clear and comprehensive rehabilitation law might inadvertently validate the former ideological stances of some prisoners, which the current state narrative aims to avoid.

He suggested that the intention may be to sidestep the potential conflation, at least in political discourse, of the historical injustice suffered by the persecuted with the rehabilitation of their Stalinist or pro-Soviet sympathies. Nevertheless, he asserted that equating the acknowledgment of innocent victims’ rehabilitation with the endorsement of the ideologies attributed to them is fundamentally misguided. It is imperative that any potential legal solution includes an explicit condemnation of Stalinist ideology and a clear distancing from its legacy.

“If the Montenegrin political community desires to demonstrate its democratic integrity, it must unequivocally recognize and acknowledge the injustices inflicted upon former prisoners and their families, including the inhumane treatment they received and the denial of a fair trial, irrespective of their ideological stance at that time. This acknowledgment does not equate to the rehabilitation of a radical ideology like Stalinism but affirms basic principles of justice and human dignity,” Zečević emphasized.

Gorjanc Prelević: PES’ Response is Disheartening

Milatović’s initiative garnered public support only from the ruling Democrats and the Socialist People’s Party. Other parliamentary majority members, excluding PES, have refrained from commenting, though some unofficially conveyed to “Vijesti” their openness to supporting the proposal.

PES, the party formerly associated with the President of Montenegro, stated that while Milatović’s idea is compassionate, the current political climate may lead to “further divisions and polarization,” as well as the opening of other painful historical issues.

“Therefore, PES advocates for uniting political players and the public around meeting Montenegro’s strategic objectives as outlined in the ‘Barometer 26’ document,” said PES MP Miodrag Laković, adding that this and similar matters should be deferred until after achieving the “state priorities” for which citizens have given them a mandate.

Conversely, opposition members—both officially and unofficially—have indicated to “Vijesti” that they perceive the President’s proposal as a personal political rehabilitation attempt and are disinclined to comment on his initiatives.

Tea Gorjanc Prelević, Executive Director of Human Rights Action (HRA), shared with the newspaper that her organization plans to send a proposal to Prime Minister Milojko Spajić (PES) with further arguments advocating for the rehabilitation of Goli Otok victims, expressing hope that he might regard it more thoughtfully and use this opportunity to perform a “beneficial act,” unlike his predecessors.

“Advancement lies in confronting harsh truths, not shunning them,” she asserted.

Gorjanc Prelević remarked that there is always an opportunity for a “beneficial act,” particularly as this recognition is two decades overdue, especially considering that time is running out for the last living Goli Otok survivors. From her perspective, this represents the final chance to pass the law, making it difficult to comprehend how PES could be “so quick to dismiss” it.

“Regardless of the complex historical circumstances surrounding that time, as well as the possible actions against the interests of the state, the Goli Otok captives should not have endured the pain they did, nor should they have been imprisoned without trial and the right to defense. Acknowledging the individual unjust suffering of each prisoner and their families is a vital lesson in preventing such injustices from occurring again,” she pointed out, highlighting that, in this vein, current events observe parallels with Guantanamo.

“Thus, we cannot dismiss the recurrence of such phenomena,” she concluded.

Over Three Thousand Prisoners from Montenegro

President Milatović’s initiative pertains to individuals who were imprisoned without a (fair) trial and lacking valid evidence, whether through administrative action or otherwise, subjected to inhumane conditions and torture (both physical and psychological) on Goli Otok, Sveti Grgur, and other facilities due to alleged allegiance to the Informburo Resolution of 1948.

The Informburo succeeded the Comintern (Communist International), an organization of communist parties, and its resolution condemned the leadership of the Communist Party of Yugoslavia, headed by Josip Broz Tito, for deviating from Marxist-Leninist doctrines, among other things.

This culminated in a rift between Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union, prompting authorities in Yugoslavia to persecute those deemed supporters of Soviet leader Joseph Stalin, all while the Red Army threatened military action on the borders of what was then Yugoslavia.

A network of prisons was established for those identified as informers, the largest being located on Goli Otok, an island near Rab in Croatia.

According to the former Federal Secretariat of Internal Affairs of the SFRY, between 1956 and 16.101, there were 1,949 prisoners in Goli Otok and other prisons in this system, with 3,390 of them hailing from Montenegro (accounting for 21 percent of the total detainee population). Only a handful of these individuals remain alive today…

It is estimated that up to 300 individuals perished on Goli Otok.

Milatović has proposed using the Draft Law on the Annulment of Judgments, Decisions, Acts, and Actions of State Bodies of the Republic of Montenegro and the FNRY, prepared by the Citizens’ Association “Goli Otok” in 2006, as the basis for drafting the law.

The document states that the right to compensation for damages belongs to the spouse or, in the absence of a spouse, the children of the deceased, murdered, or missing individual.

Thus far, the only official act adopted in Montenegro addressing compensation for political prisoners is the Declaration on the Condemnation of Violations of Human Rights and Abuse of Power, passed by the Parliament of Montenegro in January 1992. This document condemned “gross human rights violations and abuses, arrests, and mistreatment of innocent individuals, terror against detainees on Goli Otok and other infamous camps and prisons, which resulted in numerous innocent victims and undeserved persecution of many,” with the state pledging to provide moral and legal redress to all affected parties.

Potential High Compensation and Broad Legal Requirements

Nikola Zečević also posited that one of the hurdles towards the rehabilitation of Goli Otok prisoners could be related to the potential inclusion of material compensation for the surviving victims or their families within the law. Given the comparatively large number of detainees from Montenegro, the financial implications for compensation may be significant, with a wide range of legal claims (pension rights, additional restitution, non-pecuniary damages) possible.

The 2006 draft law suggested a compensation amount of 10,000 euros.

In contrast, Serbia, Croatia, and Slovenia have enacted legislation permitting the rehabilitation and compensation of former political prisoners and their families.

In 2003, Slovenia offered Goli Otok survivors 6,300 euros for each year served, while Croatia and Serbia provided approximately seven euros per day spent in the camp.

Bajagić: Milatović’s Proposal is Timely; Traumas Persist

Radmila Bajagić, the daughter-in-law of Goli Otok inmate Mihailo Bajagić, informed “Vijesti” that too much time has elapsed for the initiative to rehabilitate camp inmates to be delayed any further. She asserted that it should be recognized as a significant step towards societal democratization, rectifying historical wrongs, and fostering key elements of social cohesion.

Bajagić expressed that Milatović’s proposal arrives at a critical juncture and aligns with the collective social interest, contributing to the fulfillment of obligations from Montenegro’s integration pre-accession process, based on the democratic standards expected of EU member states.

Bajagić acknowledged that the government rushed in 2001 to “break” from the former regime’s legacy, primarily through the Decree opening the State Security Service’s secret files, rather than through a legally mandated process, which constituted a gross violation of fundamental human rights.

She explained that access to these files was time-limited to one year, intended as the starting point for the reform of the security service, leading to its transformation into the National Security Agency. She highlighted that the most significant interest in accessing these secret files came from informants and their families.

“Those carrying traumas passed down through generations remain unhealed. The aforementioned ad hoc reforms underscore the inconsistency in confronting the past and validate President Milatović’s assertion that this complex area requires legal regulation,” she emphasized.

According to her, an approach must be chosen that incorporates modalities and instruments appropriate to Montenegrin culture and specific circumstances to ensure legal and moral rehabilitation for those unjustly imprisoned and tortured for their political beliefs. Additionally, adequate compensation must be defined for victims and their families, who suffered injustice while their children’s opportunities for advancement were hindered.

Such a legal resolution could encompass: recognition of the victims’ suffering, moral rehabilitation, financial recompense, memory preservation, and awareness-raising efforts.

“This legal solution could significantly enhance social cohesion, justice, and equality in society, contributing to the construction of a better future,” Bajagić concluded.

News