Legal Pressures on Media Highlighted by Nebojsa Vucinic

Montenegro is facing significant political and legal challenges, as highlighted by concerns from legal experts regarding potential pressures on media outlets and critical democratic thought. In a recent interview with Televizija E, Professor of Law and former judge of the European Court of Human Rights, Nebojsa Vucinic, pointed out serious legal indications that suggest interference with certain media and the public’s right to critique the government.

Vucinic emphasized that despite the complex political, legal, and moral landscape in Montenegro, the country’s courts and judges maintain the credibility necessary to clarify these issues. He stated, “The fundamental function of media in a democratic society is to critically challenge the authorities.” He expressed concern that the current state of affairs undermines the presumption of innocence, which has become absurd in Montenegro.

The professor noted that recent detentions appear designed to sway public opinion on matters that would otherwise be challenging to influence. He remarked, “In all situations where there is much noise and spectacle, there is little substance and content.” Vucinic raised alarms about the selective dissemination of information and the privileged status of certain media, indicating strong suspicions of political pressure aimed at silencing dissenting voices, whether they belong to individuals or media outlets.

Vucinic cautioned that Montenegro risks losing its aspirations to be a democratic society. He reminded listeners that every ruling from the European Court contains references to Article 10 regarding freedom of thought and expression, and the role of media. “The media’s purpose is to compel the government to act in accordance with the public’s interests,” he asserted.

He further elaborated on the increasing instances of journalists seeking protection from the European Court of Human Rights. Vucinic indicated that there is sufficient material in the current situation to warrant an appeal to Strasbourg. “You must go through the appropriate procedures of the Montenegrin judicial system, up to the Constitutional Court, before proceeding,” he explained.

While there have been various cases where authorities have institutionalized attacks on specific media outlets, Vucinic cited other countries such as Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Switzerland where media have sought legal recourse to maintain their independence. He affirmed, “The ultimate option for targeted media and journalists is to utilize the court in Strasbourg,” though he expressed hope that such measures would not be necessary.

Vucinic expressed confidence that independent and fair judicial processes would ultimately clarify these matters, determining guilt or innocence as appropriate. He referred to the Krstovic family case as a strong indication that the right to the presumption of innocence is not functioning correctly, a fundamental legal principle that has emerged from centuries of European revolutions.

“I have faith in the courts and hope they will bring these issues to resolution,” Vucinic concluded, stressing the importance of upholding democratic principles in Montenegro’s evolving political landscape.