The passing of the Law on Ratification of the Agreement on Cooperation in Tourism and Real Estate Development with the United Arab Emirates (UAE) without the necessary majority specified by the Constitution creates grounds for it to be challenged in the Constitutional Court due to formal unconstitutionality, according to a statement from the Lawyers’ Association of Montenegro.

The association elaborated on the commentary from Human Rights Action (HRA) regarding the requirement for a two-thirds majority for the adoption of the Law on Ratification of the Agreement on Cooperation in Tourism and Real Estate Development with the UAE, emphasizing three clear points.

“Firstly, the Agreement (validated by the Law) specifically states in Article 1 that it includes ‘mixed-use real estate,’ which would establish a different property regime for foreigners than the current legal framework in Montenegro. Additionally, Article 3 of the Agreement specifies that the Government of Montenegro will ‘take all necessary measures to secure the land’ without needing to follow the public procurement or tender processes defined by national legislation governing state property, which significantly alters the existing legal framework relating to property rights for foreigners concerning state-owned property.

Secondly, Article 91, point 5 of the Constitution of Montenegro clearly states that ‘the Parliament shall decide by a two-thirds majority of all deputies on laws regulating the electoral system and property rights of foreigners.’

Thirdly, the constitutional definition of ‘property rights of foreigners’ encompasses not only ownership rights but also narrower rights such as easements, liens, and obligations like leases, concessions, services, storage, as well as intellectual property rights,” the statement clarified.

The Lawyers’ Association further noted that even though the law’s advocate insisted that “land will not be alienated (sold) but merely leased,” they caution that Article 91, paragraph 5 of the Constitution is not solely concerning the fundamental property right of ownership and its alienation, but extends to the establishment of other property rights for foreigners, including leases.

“Given these undeniable facts, the enactment of the aforementioned law without the constitutionally mandated majority opens the potential for it to be contested in the Constitutional Court on the basis of formal unconstitutionality. Consequently, the Legislative Committee of the Parliament of Montenegro ought to reconvene to examine these points and address this issue, as failure to do so could lead to a subsequent ‘overturning’ of the law in the Constitutional Court, thereby severely damaging Montenegro’s international reputation and creating significant repercussions for both the state and prospective investors,” stated the Lawyers’ Association.

They also indicated that the Constitutional Committee of the Parliament of Montenegro must review this matter in line with its authority to “evaluate issues of principle concerning the Constitution” prior to the plenary vote.

“This clearly raises the question of the necessity to enforce Article 91, paragraph 5 of the Constitution of Montenegro, which obligates the Parliament to decide ‘on the property rights of foreigners’ with a two-thirds majority,” the Lawyers’ Association said.

President Jakov Milatović did not sign the Law on Ratification of the Agreement on Cooperation in Tourism and Real Estate Development between the Government of Montenegro and the Government of the UAE, returning it to the Parliament of Montenegro for further consideration.

As informed today by the Office of the President of Montenegro, Milatović has signed the Law on Ratification of the Agreement on Economic Cooperation between the Government of Montenegro and the Government of the United Arab Emirates.

News