Civic Montenegro has long been a guiding principle for many citizens; however, its realization has been hindered by a lack of awareness within state institutions regarding its significance, as well as challenges in implementing civic democratic values amidst political, ethnic, and social divides.

This perspective was conveyed by interviewees from “Vijesti” when discussing whether civic Montenegro has ever truly existed or if it remains an unrealized aspiration for a segment of society.

According to the Constitution, Montenegro is designated as a civic state, where sovereignty resides with the citizen. Yet, what does this civic concept truly embody in reality, or what should it symbolize if, as some political figures argue, it is absent?

Sociologist Biljana Maslovarić posits that civic Montenegro is one where national identity is irrelevant; individual identity is forged through adherence to laws, institutions, and a commitment to justice, fairness, communal well-being, sustainability, humanity, and nature. She notes that this notion has represented an ideal that many citizens and political factions have aspired to throughout various historical epochs.

“There have been moments in recent history when civil democracy, equality, and individual rights were actively promoted, particularly during the 2006 independence referendum for Montenegro. Nevertheless, the genuine application of those principles has often been obstructed by political, ethnic, and social strife,” Maslovarić told “Vijesti”.

Reclaiming the Appropriated Ideals

She remarked that civic Montenegro can be seen as an objective that is still evolving and remains distant.

“Our challenge lies in the persistence of working towards that objective while bridging the divides that separate us,” she emphasized.

Multiple parliamentary factions assert that they embody the principles of a civic Montenegro and advocate for them, while others claim that this narrative does not align with reality and that some parties mask their true nationalist inclinations.

Maslovarić aligns with this assertion, stating that the primary parties responsible for undermining civic democratic values are those frequently identifying as “democratic,” which she describes as “nationalist-chauvinist strongholds focused on egoistic power accumulation.”

“Thus, it is crucial that we compel them to ‘return’ the vision of a civic Montenegro by advocating for open electoral lists. At this juncture, I deem it imperative that we push politicians to work in the interest of the general social good,” the sociologist remarked.

Regarding what civic Montenegro should entail, educator and activist Neđeljko Necko Đurović told “Vijesti” that a “civic community” encapsulates a network of social relations devoid of exclusivity and conflict, featuring a decision-making system where all members participate equally, with capability, integrity, and knowledge gaining recognition.

“Apart from some Scandinavian countries, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada, few nations genuinely embody civil society. Therefore, Montenegrin society must continually promote tolerance to embrace diversity and interculturality, fostering mutual respect as equal and free members of the social order. Correspondingly, every public assertion regarding any individual or collective vulnerability must be duly acknowledged and penalized both for transgressing civil rights and for tendentious misinterpretations and self-victimization,” he emphasized.

The Civil State Has Yet to Find Its Breath.

Đurović believes that calls to revive a “former civic Montenegro” are ludicrous at this juncture, “since such civic Montenegro has never truly ‘existed’.”

“State institutions remain largely filled with compliant and passive individuals, lacking the drive for transformation. Meanwhile, free-thinking and proactive citizens have largely continued to reside outside these institutions, their voices and ideas often ignored by the media,” he added.

The interlocutor stated that Montenegrin reality is characterized by a blend of “existential populism and aggressive rightist ideologies,” warranting no surprise at absurdities like certain political actors claiming that “civic Montenegro doesn’t exist while simultaneously advocating for its full integration into the EU.”

“This oxymoronic assertion by specific political factions strangely resonates with the rhetoric of past decades,” Đurović argued, noting that it mirrors discussions from the pre-referendum era and evokes themes reminiscent of the 90s.

“In Montenegro, no one has faced repercussions for ethnically driven crimes, no apologies have been issued for widespread hate speech, accountability for privatization crimes remains absent, and political dissenters continue to be persecuted,” he stressed.

In response to the feasibility of restoring or constructing a civic Montenegro, Biljana Maslovarić expressed that due to ongoing tensions and divisions, “establishing a true civic Montenegro” appears to be a daunting task, but not unattainable.

“Conversely, it requires time, patience, and effort to bridge divides and construct institutions that represent all citizens, regardless of ethnic, political, or other affiliations. Education, dialogue, and mutual understanding are pivotal for cultivating such a society. It is vital for all stakeholders to engage in this process, ensuring that solutions are acceptable to all,” she stated.

When queried about who might spearhead such initiatives and whether any political forces possess the capacity and will to bridge divisions and promote civic identity, the interviewee expressed confidence that these individuals and factions do exist.

“True leaders prioritize citizens’ interests above their political ambitions and act as connectors between various groups,” Maslovarić emphasized.

“Authentic Representation” is Detrimental

Đurović informed “Vijesti” that the civic concept, while declared in the Constitution, has never genuinely been granted a chance to flourish, as its foundational prerequisites hinge on completing the democratization process and upholding the rule of law within the state.

He elucidated that experiences from evolving political systems indicate that internal issues and external pressures within a society are optimally managed by facilitating the development of “participatory democracy.” He observed that countries with various forms and levels of direct and indirect citizen engagement in decision-making on public matters, alongside established methods for overseeing public services, typically avoid “high-tension scenarios,” as the shortcomings of officials become swiftly apparent during contentious periods.

“Civil society cannot thrive when the administration operates more through impromptu government sessions determining vital national interests than through regular sessions where draft legislation and planning documents undergo thorough public discourse,” noted the civic activist.

He added, “when public officials function primarily as puppets to their long-standing political leaders and parties, which, due to closed electoral lists, have devolved into insular clubs, the state governance system becomes increasingly hesitant to welcome constructive criticism.”

“Genuine critique of any administration is rooted in catering to the diverse individual needs and interests that can only be appropriately met in a well-organized community. That is why irresponsible state authorities in ethnically diverse nations dismiss civil society models, often citing national, religious, cultural, or other collective threats,” Đurović concluded.

He asserted that the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina exemplifies how every irresponsible and ineffective government conceals itself behind ambiguous collective objectives.

“The civic paradigm is directly jeopardized by the so-called ‘authentic representation’, whose harmful applications are adeptly leveraged by political oligarchies in Montenegro. These deceptive displays of purported national, religious, or even foreign policy priorities, such as the insincere pursuit of EU principles in our case, function as a veil for state plunder while stoking divisions and identity conflicts,” said Đurović.

He remarked that challenges currently afflicting the ongoing development of Montenegro as a civil and open society are numerous, and that the existing civil parties are not equipped to lead this effort—nor should they be.

“The real potential resides within the civil sector and motivated citizens who eagerly await electoral reform aimed at creating more openness, while our educational system must foster awareness in future generations through the integration of civic education and media literacy initiatives,” Đurović emphasized.

“Civil Montenegro is Not an Illusion”

Some current ruling and opposition parties acknowledge the necessity of advancing the notion of a civic state, asserting that they can be at the forefront of overcoming divisions and promoting civic identity.

The ruling Socialist People’s Party (SNP) stated in a message to “Vijesti” that civic Montenegro represents a core value that they have upheld since their inception.

“In recent decades, attempts have been made to foster a society of equal citizens; however, these endeavors have often been superficial and tainted by political manipulation. Rather than pursuing genuine civic politics, we were governed by a regime that exploited identity-related issues to maintain power, consequently undermining public trust. However, civic Montenegro has never been an unrealistic ambition; it is a value we aspire to, remaining both real and achievable despite the prevailing hurdles.”

Boško Laketić, head of the media team for the opposition Civic Movement (GP) URA, reminded that Montenegro is defined as a civil state by the Constitution, yet “it is apparent to everyone that this has not translated into practice and that this goal remains distant.” He attributes the current situation to the political elites.

“Regrettably, for decades, dominant political elites have compelled us to identify ourselves along national and religious lines, making it impossible for our society as a whole to break free from these constraints and progress towards a value-based intercultural society. Certain political entities find such a situation convenient; when they lack substantial offerings for citizens, they swiftly pivot public attention towards national and religious issues,” he remarked.

Nonetheless, as he stated, a civic Montenegro “exists and will persist, even if it presently appears to be an ideal—a commendable ideal worthy of our struggle.”

“Unfortunately, at this juncture, the GP URA lacks many allies in this pursuit, yet that will not deter us; quite the contrary,” he affirmed.

The opposition European Alliance, composed of the Social Democratic Party, the Social Democrats, and the Liberal Party, conveyed that civic Montenegro “has existed in the past and will continue to do so,” asserting that it is also an ideal that is perpetually pursued, evolving with time, gained civil liberties, and socio-political contexts.

“Even once civil society values are predominantly accepted in Montenegro, the fight for their preservation and advancement will not cease. This ongoing responsibility involves a struggle against regressive nationalist and chauvinistic ideologies, whose proponents in the Western Balkans are relentless in their efforts to bifurcate societies along ethnic lines to fulfill their dictatorial aspirations,” they stated.

The alliance highlighted that the principles of civil society were established three and a half decades ago by the very entities that comprise this coalition today—parties, anti-war movements, media and organizations from the 90s, independent intellectuals, and social activists who uphold values of liberty, anti-fascism, and individual rights, irrespective of religious, national, ethnic, or other affiliations.

“It is precisely these entities that led to Montenegro being enshrined as a civil state in our Constitution, where citizens are the sovereign bearers of power.”

The European Union noted that over the course of the past three and a half decades, the influence of civic values and their representatives on societal trends in Montenegro has fluctuated, acknowledging that “we currently find ourselves in a regressive phase, heading toward a situation reminiscent of the early 20s.”

“There is a resurgence of nationalist and right-wing politics, alongside robust attempts to enforce ethnic federalization within our society; the term ‘civic’ increasingly carries a pejorative connotation, while civic politics is labeled as ineffective and unconvincing. Nevertheless, the paradigm of an open civil democratic society surpasses all others in Montenegro, and we remain certain its values will ultimately triumph,” they asserted.

The ruling Europe Now Movement (PES), New Serbian Democracy, Democratic People’s Party, Bosniak Party, and the opposition Democratic Party of Socialists did not provide input to “Vijesti” regarding this subject matter.

Parties Reportedly Ready to Bridge Divides

When asked who might lead the efforts to bridge divisions and affirm civic identity, the SNP, GP URA, and the European Union expressed their willingness to be integral to that endeavor.

The SNP noted that certain parties have initiated divisions that have “regressed” Montenegro, remarking that “a rhetoric of exclusivity and division along national or religious lines will not cultivate reconciliation or progress.”

“The SNP believes it is both possible and essential to restore mutual trust and construct a truly civic state. This necessitates a society where we transcend national and religious divisions, collaborating for economic advancement, social security, and the upholding of the rule of law.”

They further stated their commitment to participating in this process, asserting that “unity, equality, and justice are essential” for Montenegro’s success.

Boško Laketić, when addressing the feasibility of renewing or constructing a civic Montenegro amid escalating societal divisions, expressed pessimism if the current ruling coalition retains its power.

“With the establishment of Prime Minister Milojko Spajić’s (PES) administration, the momentum for civic-centric options has waned, while right-wing alternatives have resurged…”

He attributed this trend to the fact that “the purportedly civic options of PES and Democrats have been overshadowed by constituents of the former Democratic Front (DF), seeking to maintain their seats as they grow in number,” adding that many rightfully observe Andrija Mandić as the effective leader of the current ruling coalition.

“Furthermore, to compound matters, Milojko Spajić’s administration has largely adopted and, in some aspects, even surpassed the ruling tactics of the previous regime, culminating in the recent agreement with the United Arab Emirates. Such a trajectory poses significant discouragement for civic-minded voters. Thus, with this government in power, it will be challenging to garner substantial citizen support for the parties advocating for civic Montenegro in the near future,” he concluded.

The European Union stressed that constructing an “authentic civic Montenegro” is imperative, “or else we will lack a stable, successful, democratic, and developed Montenegro.”

“… While the values of civil society are superior to their counterparts, advocates and proponents of civil policies must demonstrate to citizens through concrete programs and actions why choosing these policies is always preferable.”

News