On the occasion of World NGO Day, the Centre for Civic Education (CCE) highlights a serious gap between declarative support and the actual conditions in which non-governmental organisations operate in Montenegro. Although the NGO sector has for years been recognised as an important actor in processes of democratisation, Europeanisation, and the protection of the public interest, the institutional and normative framework still fails to ensure stable, predictable, and enabling conditions for its functioning.
On the one hand, we record a significant level of public trust in the NGO sector. Data from the December CG Pulse survey, a joint initiative of CCE and the DAMAR Institute, indicate that the NGO sector is among the most positively assessed social actors, ranking above numerous institutions, including the Government of Montenegro. The continuity of these findings has also been confirmed through earlier research conducted within the CCE programme “CSOs in Montenegro – from Basic Services to Policy Shaping – M’BASE.” Such trends demonstrate that the public recognises the role of civil society, but also that this trust remains fragile and easily undermined in an environment where the space for action is limited.
At the same time, there is a growing perception that adequate conditions for the development of non-governmental organisations capable of acting independently, critically, and consistently – including in their role as a corrective to the authorities – do not exist in Montenegro. This is the result of a long-term process in which the space for autonomous civil society action has gradually narrowed through institutional pressures, selective support, and the absence of guarantees of independence.
It is particularly concerning that, parallel to public statements by the highest state officials emphasising the importance of the NGO sector’s expertise and experience in the European integration process, solutions are being proposed and shaped that place these same organisations in a state of legal and financial uncertainty. This imbalance between rhetoric and practice further deepens distrust and creates a sense of insecurity within a sector that should be a partner in shaping and implementing public policies, yet now more than ever finds itself excluded from substantive decision-making processes.
In such an environment, an additional risk is posed by the Draft Law on Non-Governmental Organisations, which was published without adequate justification, thereby undermining the transparency of the legislative process. Although the Draft contains certain positive developments, such as increasing the percentage of budget funds allocated for financing projects and programmes in areas of public interest from 0.3% to 0.38% of the budget, as well as increasing allocations for the protection of persons with disabilities, the key financing criteria and procedures are left to by-laws. This replaces legal certainty with the current will of the executive branch, opening space for arbitrary interpretations and deepening the sector’s dependence on the executive authority, as such acts can be amended swiftly and without public involvement or the necessary parliamentary majority.
Concern is also raised by the trend of strengthening supervisory and control mechanisms over the work of non-governmental organisations, as the institutional framework is developing more in the direction of restriction than empowerment of the civil sector. Particularly problematic are measures that, under the pretext of alignment with international recommendations, such as those issued by MONEYVAL, may be interpreted and applied in ways that produce effects of pressure, discouragement, and intimidation. For example, insisting on strict background checks of NGO founders and threatening automatic deletion from the registry due to administrative omissions do not contribute to improving the system, but may instead result in the elimination of smaller and more vulnerable organisations.
Pressures on the civil sector through normative initiatives also include attempts to make critical action financially risky, specifically through amendments to the Law on Free Access to Information. Such practices send a dangerous message that the struggle for transparency, accountability, and the rule of law is being made prohibitively expensive, instead of being encouraged as a socially desirable and democratically necessary activity.
CCE reminds that the NGO sector does not seek a privileged status, but rather a predictable, stable, and fair institutional framework in which laws apply equally to all, and are not selectively used as instruments of pressure. The path toward the EU cannot be built through methods of coercion and disciplining dissenting voices. The NGO sector remains one of the key correctives of government and an indispensable pillar of democratic development. At a time when the space for critical and independent action is further narrowing, preserving and strengthening the NGO sector becomes a fundamental issue of Montenegro’s democratic stability and social development — and primary responsibility for this lies with decision-makers.