Montenegrin Parliament Speaker, Andrija Mandic. Photo: EPA-EFE/CATI CLADERA.
Montenegro’s parliament on Thursday did not debate a motion to dismiss Andrija Mandic of the right-wing New Serbian Democracy party as parliamentary speaker as previously planned, because there was no quorum to hold the session.
The trigger for the planned vote was the message of condolence that Mandic sent to the son of former Bosnian Serb military commander and genocide convict Ratko Mladic after his recent death.
The opposition Democratic Party of Socialists, DPS responded to the blocked vote by saying that it will submit the motion to dismiss Mandic again at the next plenary session.
The DPS also said that until a session is held at which lawmakers are allowed to vote on the dismissal of Mandic, it will not cooperate with the government or the parliamentary majority.
“We will not participate in a simulation of democracy … From today, this government is holding Montenegro’s political stability hostage,” DPS leader Danijel Zivkovic told a news conference in parliament.
“[Mandic] did not even allow a quorum to be established, so that it could be determined who was in the chamber, if anyone … And then there is the treatment of media representatives, who were not allowed to enter the chamber,” Zivkovic said.
There was already a heated atmosphere in parliament because Mandic did not allow the extraordinary session to be broadcast or the media to enter the plenary hall, prompting opposition lawmakers and some members of the ruling majority to leave the chamber.
Boris Mugosa, leader of the opposition European Alliance accused Mandic and the parties in the government allied to New Serbian Democracy of “brutally violating the constitution by preventing the session from being held”.
The DPS announcement that it will suspend cooperation with the government and the governing majority could complicate the closing of negotiating chapters on Montenegro’s path to the EU, as this also requires a constitutional amendment that needs a two-thirds majority in parliament.
The Europe Now Movement, part of the governing coalition, said it was “the democratic and constitutional right of every lawmaker to decide whether to take part in consideration of a particular agenda item”.
But it added: “At the same time, we view statements by some opposition figures that they will not vote for the constitutional amendments necessary to close the negotiating chapters as an attempt to seize power before the elections by using Montenegro’s European path as leverage.”
New Serbian Democracy was defiant however, painting the outcome as a victory for pro-EU, pro-Serbian politician Mandic ahead of the parliamentary elections, which must be held by June 2027.
“The score on the board is 3-0: three for Andrija Mandic, for a European future, and zero for those who want divisions,” New Serbian Democracy MP Dejan Djurovic told a press conference.
Facts Only
* The Parliament did not debate a motion to dismiss Speaker Andrija Mandic because there was no quorum.
* The planned vote was triggered by a condolence message sent by Mandic to Ratko Mladic's son.
* The opposition Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS) stated it would resubmit the motion at the next plenary session.
* The DPS announced it would suspend cooperation with the government or parliamentary majority until a session is held where a vote on dismissal is allowed.
* Opposition leader Danijel Zivkovic stated they would not participate in a simulation of democracy.
* Zivkovic noted that Mandic did not allow a quorum to be established and denied access to media representatives.
* Boris Mugosa accused Mandic and the ruling parties of violating the constitution by preventing the session from being held.
* The Europe Now Movement argued for the right of lawmakers to decide on agenda items.
* New Serbian Democracy framed the outcome as a victory for Mandic and a pro-EU future.
Executive Summary
Full Take
The dynamic described highlights a tension between procedural legitimacy, political maneuvering, and constitutional goals. The attempt by one side to use a procedural deadlock—the lack of quorum—to halt a politically significant vote reveals a contest over the very mechanism of democratic functioning. The invocation of the requirement for a quorum transforms a simple procedural hurdle into a high-stakes political standoff, suggesting that control over parliamentary procedure is conflated with control over governmental direction.
The response from the opposition, threatening to suspend cooperation, demonstrates a strategy focused on leveraging systemic instability to extract concessions regarding Montenegro’s EU trajectory. This suggests that the immediate political conflict serves a larger strategic aim: forcing a recalculation of power dynamics ahead of upcoming elections or in relation to pending constitutional changes. Furthermore, the contrasting narratives—one emphasizing democratic right (Europe Now Movement) and the other emphasizing political victory (New Serbian Democracy)—reveal how different political actors frame the same events to support divergent agendas regarding sovereignty and future direction. The underlying pattern is a struggle over whether procedural legitimacy supersedes political will, and what happens when institutional procedures are weaponized to block necessary political processes.
BRIDGE QUESTIONS:
What constitutional mechanisms exist within Montenegrin law to adjudicate disputes over parliamentary procedure when quorum issues become politically charged? How do systemic failures in parliamentary process impact long-term strategic goals like EU accession negotiations when domestic political alignment is fractured? What are the long-term consequences for institutional trust when procedural blockage is used as a primary tool for political leverage?
Sentinel — Human
The text functions as a report detailing a specific political standoff in Montenegro, relying on direct quotes from involved parties to convey the conflict and stated positions.