Parliamentary immunity should not serve to protect MPs in investigation proceedings, but to be applied only to acts concerning exclusively the position of an MP in the Parliament, professor Vladimir Goati, a political analyst, told Pobjeda newspaper.
Montenegrin lawmakers do not differ from “ordinary” citizens only when it comes to salaries and privileges, but also because they are often given the opportunity to be above the law. Parliamentary immunity protects them against investigation and prosecution, which calls the principle of equality before the law into question.
To avoid such abuses, the issue of limiting the immunity only to protecting freedom of speech has been often raised recently.
Even MPs themselves have repeatedly emphasised that the immunity institution should be limited. However, when they were able to lift some fellow MP’s immunity, they jointly voted “against” for years.
There are various experiences in other countries in defining this institute. The most often solution is the one according to which immunity is established as an independent means of protection of MPs in the plenary sessions and working bodies. In Croatia, for example, the Law on Criminal Procedure of the State Prosecutor allows launching investigation against MPs without the prior approval of parliament.
Goati believes that the immunity in our country involves too broad benefits, and that it should be defined in line with the modern western democracy.
In these countries, parliamentary immunity is related solely to the work an MP performs in the parliament. However, if he/she insults someone privately or makes a serious crime that has nothing to do with politics, the immunity does not protect him/her, Goati said.
According to him, changing the constitutional norms related to immunity should be done in “a calm atmosphere, when there are no current cases”.
He says previous parliamentary solidarity not to lift the immunity to each other is not surprising.
“Although they are from different parties, MPs are reluctant to do so. It is about solidarity, but also about the principle ‘today it is happening to him/her, tomorrow it will be me’. But I think society will overcome that as democracy develops,” said Goati.
The most recent example of lifting immunity stirred the passions and even caused a serious incident in the Parliament hall. That happened when the Parliament, in the absence of the opposition, stripped DF MPs Andrija Mandic and Milan Knezevic from parliamentary immunity, upon the request of the special state prosecutor Milivoje Katnic.
Mandic and Knezevic have been suspected of crimes creation of a criminal organisation and preparing acts against the constitutional order and security of Montenegro, performed by incitement.
The Constitution of Montenegro stipulates that a deputy enjoys immunity and cannot be called to criminal or other liability, nor may be detained for an opinion or vote. An MP cannot be prosecuted or detained without the approval of the Parliament, unless he/she is caught in committing a criminal offense which carries a sentence of more than five years in prison.
However, not only MPs are protected by immunity. President of Montenegro, prime minister and cabinet members, the president of the Supreme Court, the president and judges of the Constitutional Court and supreme state prosecutor also enjoy immunity against prosecution.
