EditTest for the ruling coalition in Montenegro
Andrija Mandić keeps the speakership, but his condolences to the Mladić family have split the ruling majority and put Montenegro’s final EU reforms at risk
Although Andrija Mandić has survived a third attempt to remove him as Montenegro’s speaker, the political crisis triggered by his condolences to Ratko Mladić’s family is far from over. Quite the contrary: it has become a test of relations within the ruling coalition, and of the ability of the government and the opposition to work together on the final reforms needed on Montenegro’s path toward the European Union.
The crisis has also become a test of Montenegro’s political credibility, as Brussels warns that there is no room for the glorification of war criminals in EU candidate countries.
Attempt to remove Mandić
The immediate trigger for an initiative by the opposition Democratic Party of Socialists to dismiss Mandić was a message of condolence he sent to Darko Mladić after the death of his father, Ratko Mladić, former commander of the Army of Republika Srpska. The Hague-based International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia sentenced Mladić to life imprisonment for the Srebrenica genocide, crimes against humanity against Bosniaks and Croats in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and other war crimes. At first, the initiative looked like another opposition move unlikely to win enough votes. In the end, however, the motion to dismiss Mandić was signed by 35 MPs and was also supported by deputies of the Bosniak Party, a coalition partner of the ruling parties. That made the vote far less predictable than those triggered by previous attempts to remove him.
The parliamentary session at which lawmakers were due to vote on Mandić’s dismissal on 24 September was not held, because there was no quorum: fewer than 41 of the 81 MPs were present. The parliament’s secretary-general later said that 39 lawmakers, including Mandić, were in the chamber. The opposition claims the procedure for establishing a quorum was not transparent. There was no television broadcast, and journalists and camera crews were denied access to the plenary chamber. Mandić and the parliamentary administration say a roll call was conducted and established that not enough MPs were present. That raises a further question: whether Mandić is now in a more difficult position than before, given that he had unequivocal support on the previous two occasions when parliament voted on his dismissal.
Mandić remained in office primarily because the key party in the parliamentary majority, Prime Minister Milojko Spajić’s Europe Now Movement, was unwilling to risk his departure and the consequences such an outcome could have for the ruling coalition. For the ruling majority, the issue was not simply whether it supported Mandić’s condolences. Removing him could above all have raised the question of relations within the ruling majority and of the government’s stability ahead of parliamentary elections next year. That is one reason the case has outgrown the issue of the speaker’s personal political responsibility. Mandić has remained in office, but the episode has shown that complete unity among the governing parties no longer exists.
Mandić maintains that his message of condolence did not imply support for Ratko Mladić or his actions. He said he made no reference to Mladić’s wartime role, but rather respected the tradition of extending condolences to the family of the deceased. At the latest session of parliament, he said the Hague tribunal had ruled on Mladić and that “everyone respected” the ruling. The statement shows how politically sensitive the case is for him. Analysts see his latest remarks as an attempt to limit the damage and to balance between his traditional pro-Serbian voter base and the pro-European position he is seeking to build as one of the country’s top officials.
Reforms called into question
For Mandić, the immediate political effect is clear: he has retained one of the country’s most important offices and shown that a sufficient part of the ruling majority is unwilling to allow his removal. At the same time, the affair has reopened the question of his attitude toward the wartime past, just as he is seeking to present himself as an advocate of reconciliation and European integration and to distance himself from Serbia’s leadership, particularly President Aleksandar Vučić. The Democratic Party of Socialists has already promised a new initiative, while Dritan Abazović’s Civic Movement URA walked out of a parliamentary session, demanding that Mandić state unequivocally whether he considers Mladić a war criminal.
For the Europe Now Movement and Prime Minister Spajić, the political calculation is far more complicated. Spajić’s party avoided the immediate upheaval within the ruling majority that Mandić’s removal could have caused. At the same time, the party, whose main political goals are completing negotiations with the EU and improving living standards, must now find a way to bring the opposition back to parliament, since some key reforms cannot be carried out without its votes.
That is particularly important because of constitutional amendments through which the government wants to introduce prior integrity checks for prime minister-designates and candidates for government posts. At least 54 votes are needed to initiate constitutional changes. The first attempt, on 16 September, received 46. Government and opposition MPs discussed the proposal two days later at the EU Delegation offices in Podgorica, but failed to reach an agreement. After the dispute over Mandić, the Democratic Party of Socialists made it clear that it would not cooperate with the cabinet and the parliamentary majority until a vote was allowed on the speaker’s responsibility. Spajić rejected that condition and warned that the political dispute should stay outside the reforms necessary for EU membership. The government is trying to separate any possible slowdown in EU integration from the Mandić case, while the opposition claims the opposite: that it cannot be expected to provide a consensus for decisions requiring a two-thirds majority while being denied a debate in parliament on Mandić’s responsibility. Analysts say that by protecting Mandić, Spajić’s party has put its own European credibility at risk.
The Democratic Party of Socialists failed to achieve its primary objective, as Mandić remained speaker, but the opposition party now has greater political leverage in negotiations on reforms that require the votes of its representatives. There is, however, a considerable risk in this. If constitutional and other reforms are blocked, the ruling parties will seek to hold the opposition responsible for any slowdown in EU negotiations.
All eyes are therefore on Brussels. The day after the unsuccessful parliamentary session, European Commissioner for Enlargement Marta Kos spoke with Spajić and said Montenegro was in the final stage of negotiations, but that successfully completing them required political unity, stability, continued reforms and progress in good-neighbourly relations. A spokesman for the European Commission, Guillaume Mercier, was even more direct, saying that in the final stage of negotiations the focus on reforms, and broad political support for them, must be maintained, particularly in the area of the rule of law. Montenegro has already closed 18 negotiating chapters and wants to complete accession negotiations by the end of 2026.
Vučić’s influence
The Democratic Party of Socialists claims that Vučić played a decisive role in the Mandić case. It has highlighted the fact that three MPs from Milan Knežević’s Democratic People’s Party, which is very close to Vučić, did not attend the 24 September session. The party argues that the fate of the speaker was not decided in Podgorica alone, and that Mandić’s political fate has once again demonstrated his dependence on Vučić. Knežević’s party said it changed its decision after its leader had met Mandić, insisting that it would not take a step that could facilitate his removal. The three votes from Knežević’s party would have provided a quorum, allowing the session to go ahead.
Mandić had previously made no secret of his close ties with the Serbian Progressive Party, attending the party’s celebrations of election victories at its premises in Belgrade, but he has been trying to distance himself slightly from Vučić. He has said that decisions concerning Montenegro are made in Montenegro, which the public and political analysts interpreted as a sign of somewhat greater independence from Vučić. At the same time, both Mandić and Spajić have recently been attacked by pro-government media in Serbia, and Knežević has become a fixture in Belgrade’s tabloids. The latest developments have therefore reopened the question of whether Mandić’s distancing from Vučić has been strategic, rhetorical or genuine.
MEPs warn Montenegro’s speaker before parliament vote on his removal
The article by EUalive’s partner BETA can be found here.
Caption: Andrija Mandić, Speaker of the Parliament of Montenegro [Parliament of Montenegro]
Updated: October 1, 2026 - 08:27
