Centre for Civic Education (CCE), building on its previous analyses of various aspects of the work of MPs in the 28th Parliament of Montenegro, points out that data on the average monthly income of the least active MPs in plenary sessions further raise questions about the relationship between public funds, parliamentary engagement, and accountability to citizens.
CCE has previously highlighted visible differences in the activity of MPs and parliamentary groups in plenary sessions, the costs and destinations of official trips, as well as the comparative relationship between these categories.
However, an additional overview of the average income of six MPs who ranked among the least active in plenary debates is particularly indicative. The analysis covers the period from the beginning of the 28th Parliament, that is, from 27 July 2023 to April 2026, in line with the available data on salaries paid.
CCE previously reported that the six MPs with the lowest participation in plenary debates were Gordan Stojović, Milena Vuković, Vladimir Bakrač, Jelena Kljajević, Artan Čobi and Vladimir Dobričanin. Their average monthly income varies, among other reasons, because some of their mandates began later, while for others the recorded payments were based on salary differences rather than full parliamentary salaries. Nevertheless, when these data are compared with their notably low activity in plenary sessions, a legitimate question arises about the relationship between income from public funds and visible parliamentary engagement.
Gordan Stojović, from the Europe Now Movement (PES), had an average monthly net salary of €1,809.80 over a period of nearly 30 months. His parliamentary mandate was confirmed on 16 November 2023, after the election of the Government, when PES filled the vacant parliamentary seats of its ministers. During the analysed period, he spoke in plenary sessions for only 15 minutes and 14 seconds. At the same time, Stojović undertook 23 official trips, with a total cost of €55,729.12. In financial terms, the payments made to Stojović from the Parliament on these two grounds amounted to nearly €100,000 in public funds, which makes him a striking example of a significant disproportion between visible plenary activity, income, and official travel expenses.
Milena Vuković, from the Civic Movement URA, had an average monthly net salary of €1,834.18. Her parliamentary mandate was confirmed on 11 July 2025, so the data on her income refer to a shorter period compared to most other MPs. She spoke in plenary sessions for a total of 16 minutes and 20 seconds, while no official trips at public expense were recorded for her.
In the case of Vladimir Bakrač, also from PES, the recorded average monthly net payment was €188.85, with the important note that this refers to the difference in relation to his regular salary at the University of Montenegro (UCG), and not to a full parliamentary salary. His parliamentary mandate was confirmed on 16 November 2023. Bakrač spoke in plenary sessions for 34 minutes and 26 seconds, while one official travel expense of €488.35 was recorded for him.
Jelena Kljajević, from the ZBCG – Democratic People’s Party (DNP) parliamentary group, had an average monthly net salary of €1,822.15. Her parliamentary mandate was confirmed on 29 July 2024, and since then she has spoken in plenary sessions for a total of 47 minutes and 50 seconds, along with four official trips costing a total of €305.31.
Artan Čobi, from the Albanian Forum, had the highest average monthly net salary among this group of MPs – €2,030.67. His mandate was confirmed on 16 November 2023. Čobi spoke in plenary sessions for 50 minutes and 45 seconds, while he undertook six official trips at a total cost of €2,511.08.
In the case of Vladimir Dobričanin, from the Special Parliamentary Group, the recorded average monthly net payment was €338.21, with the note that this refers to the difference in relation to his regular salary in the healthcare sector, and not to a full parliamentary salary. He spoke in plenary sessions for 56 minutes and 38 seconds. No official trips at public expense were recorded for Dobričanin during the analysed period.
These data speak not only to the level of individual income or the extent of dedication to the parliamentary role, but also to the need to assess the parliamentary function through the relationship between public funds and visible engagement. The fact that six MPs together spoke in plenary sessions for less than four hours during the analysed period, while at the same time receiving income from the parliamentary budget – and, in some cases, incurring significant official travel expenses – shows that the public must have a more complete insight into the performance and cost of its elected representatives.
CCE emphasizes that the work of MPs cannot be measured solely by the number of minutes spent speaking at the plenary lectern. Parliamentary engagement also includes work in committees, preparation of legislative initiatives, amendments and parliamentary questions, communication with citizens, and other forms of parliamentary activity. Still, the plenary remains the most visible arena for political debate, the presentation of positions, and oversight of the executive branch. Therefore, extremely low activity in this segment, alongside regular parliamentary income and the benefits attached to the office, cannot remain without public attention and legitimate scrutiny regarding the attitude toward the public interest.
Nikola Đurašević, Programme Associate