Montenegro’s CCE highlights uneven institutional response to Mladić glorification
The Montenegrin non-governmental organization Center for Civic Education (CCE) has published an analytical paper titled “Strategies of Relativizing Evil: War Criminal as ‘General’ - Glorification of Ratko Mladić as a Test of the Rule of Law and Democratic Values in Montenegro.”
"The glorification of war criminals convicted by final judgments in Montenegro is no longer a marginal phenomenon, but an issue of the rule of law, political accountability and the country’s value alignment with the European Union. Of particular concern is the uneven institutional response, which creates the impression that the boundaries of permissible conduct are determined not only by law but also by the political power of the actor concerned. These are among the key findings of the new analytical paper by the Centre for Civic Education (CCE), “Strategies of Relativising Evil: The War Criminal as a ‘General’ – The Glorification of Ratko Mladić as a Test of the Rule of Law and Democratic Values in Montenegro”, authored by Sara Čabarkapa, Active Citizenship Programme Coordinator at CCE, and Daliborka Uljarević, Executive Director of CCE.
The publication documents cases of glorification of Ratko Mladić, a war criminal convicted by a final judgment, following his death on 27 August 2026 and analyses the responses of the police, prosecution service, Government, Parliament and other institutions against the domestic legal framework, previous practice and Montenegro’s obligations in the European Union accession process.
The findings show that the glorification of Mladić did not remain on the margins of social media. It involved holders of state and local public office, party officials, representatives of religious structures, heads of public institutions and other public actors. It was accompanied by organised gatherings, banners and graffiti in several Montenegrin cities, including messages of open hatred.
In contrast to the widespread nature of the phenomenon, the institutional response was uneven. Article 370 of the Criminal Code provides Montenegro with a legal framework for acting in cases of public approval, denial or gross trivialisation of the gravity of war crimes established by final judgments, where the statutory elements are met. However, the institutional response was fastest towards groups in the street, slower towards holders of public office, and absent in relation to holders of the highest offices. The qualifications applied thus far have been in the sphere of misdemeanour rather than criminal liability. This creates a dangerous perception that the boundaries of permissible conduct are determined not only by law but also by the political position of the actor.
The analysis also points to the absence of a clear political standard at the highest level of the executive branch. Prime Minister Milojko Spajić did not personally address either the condolences expressed by President of the Parliament Andrija Mandić to Mladić’s family or the continued glorification of Ratko Mladić in Montenegro. President Jakov Milatović more clearly condemned such glorification, but took no action regarding his adviser Nebojša Vuksanović, who expressed support for one of the posts glorifying Mladić.
A particular value of the analysis lies in the fact that it does not view glorification merely as a series of individual incidents, but identifies three strategies of relativising evil. The first is the replacement of legal fact with identity-based affiliation, through references to the “judgment of the people”, the claim that “history will judge”, and challenges to the credibility of international courts. The second is heroisation through military and religious language, in which terms such as “general”, “knight” and “martyr” push the fact of the final conviction out of the public image. The third is the portrayal of crimes as the necessary defence of one’s own people, whereby facts established by final judgments are subordinated to a narrative of collective threat.
The publication also sets out concrete recommendations. The Government of Montenegro should establish a clear standard of public accountability for appointed officials who, through their public conduct, relativise war crimes established by final judgments or glorify their perpetrators. The State Prosecutor’s Office should consistently and individually assess every reported case against the elements of the relevant criminal offences, regardless of the public office held by the actor, and inform the public of the outcomes. Local self-governments should ensure prompt and consistent action regarding content in public spaces that may constitute hate speech or the glorification of war criminals, while educational institutions should strengthen teaching about the wars of the 1990s, transitional justice and facts established by final judgments.
The analysis is being published ahead of tomorrow’s vote in the Parliament of Montenegro on the initiative to dismiss President of Parliament Andrija Mandić. In the publication, CCE considers that the public expression of condolences, from the position of President of Parliament, to the family of a person convicted of genocide by a final judgment raises an issue of political accountability. The parliamentary vote will show what standard of political accountability MPs establish in relation to the conduct of a holder of one of the highest state offices. It would be very important for MPs to place democratic values above day-to-day party-political calculations, and there is no doubt that this will also be assessed by EU institutions and EU Member States.
Ratko Mladić’s death did not create a new problem in Montenegro; it merely made an old one more visible: the gap between facts established by final judgments, the state’s formal obligations and the political willingness to defend them consistently. When institutions respond differently to the glorification of war criminals depending on who is speaking, the issue is no longer merely the relationship towards the past, but the quality of the rule of law today.
The goal of the recommendations is to contribute to the consistent application of the law, accountability that increases with the level of public office, and a culture of remembrance in which attitudes towards facts established by final judgments do not depend on national or party affiliation," the analytical paper reads.
Photo Center for Civic Education of Montenegro
