CIVIC MONITORING OF THE LOCAL ELECTIONSLOCAL 2018

Final report

CIVIC MONITORING OF THE LOCAL ELECTIONS Montenegro, 27 May 2018

FINAL REPORT CIVIC MONITORING OF THE LOCAL ELECTIONS Montenegro, 27 May 2018

Centre for Monitoring and Research CeMI Blvd Josipa Broza 23 A, 4th Floor, Flat 119 81000 , Montenegro Email: [email protected] Tel/fax: +382 (0) 20 511 424 www.cemi.org.me

For the publisher: Zlatko Vujović MSc

Editors: Zlatko Vujović MSc Nikoleta Đukanović PhD

Authors: Zlatko Vujović MSc Bojan Božović MSc Nikoleta Đukanović PhD Ivan Vukčević Teodora Gilić

Circulation: 100

NAPOMENA: Mišljenja i stavovi iskazani u ovom izvještaju predstavljaju mišljenje autora i ne odražavaju nužno stavove donatora. CIVIC MONITORING OF THE LOCAL ELECTIONS Montenegro, 27 May 2018

FINAL REPORT

Contents

I SUMMARY ...... 7 II INTRODUCTION AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... 9 III POLITICAL CONTEXT ...... 9 IV LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND ELECTION SYSTEM ...... 10 A. Legal framework...... 10 B. Election system...... 11 V ELECTORAL ADMINISTRATION...... 11 VI REGISTRATION OF ELECTORAL LISTS...... 13 VII REGISTRATION OF VOTERS...... 14 VIII ELECTORAL CAMPAIGN...... 14 A Electoral campaign...... 14 B. Financing an electoral campaign...... 15 IX PARTICIPATION OF WOMEN...... 17 X PARTICIPATION OF MINORITIES ...... 17 XI ELECTION DAY ...... 18 A. Implementation of election procedures on polling stations...... 18 1. Irregularities in the work of municipal electoral commissions and the work of polling boards ...... 18 2. Irregularities in the work of polling boards ...... 19 3. Polling board work evaluation ...... 20 B. CeMI’s turnout and evaluation of election results ...... 22 C. Formal proclamation of election results ...... 23 D. Communication with the public ...... 26 XII MEDIA ...... 27 XIII INTERNATIONAL AND DOMESTIC OBSERVERS ...... 32 A. International observers ...... 32 B. Domestic observers ...... 32 XV COMPLAINTS AND APPEALS ...... 32 XVI RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 34 Priority recommendations ...... 47 Other recommendations ...... 47 A. To the ...... 34 B. To the Anti-Corruption Agency ...... 35 C. To the State Election Commission and municipal election commissions ...... 35 5 D. To the Ministry of Internal Affairs...... 36 E. To prosecutors and courts ...... 36

ANNEX– PROCESSED DATA FROM THE POLLING STATIONS OBSERVERS’ REPORT...... 39

1. Opening of polling stations ...... 41 2. The voting process ...... 44 3. Closure of polling stations and vote counting ...... 49

6 I Summary I Summary number of potential voters remain absent from electoral the register, whereas others who In addition to control through Automated the Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS),a electoral process has therefore compromised. been decisions are made with integrity. Given Agency’s the the significance, in political trust assets and and technical human resources, it unable has been to provide that evidence its processes. The Agency’s public image thushastarnished. been In spite of its considerable by coalition, ruling the indicating adegree of bias political Agency’s inthe decision-making andparties non-governmental organisations (NGOs) regarding abuse the of state resources The Anti-Corruption failed to investigatealso Agency allegations against numerouspolitical not provision the meet concerning layout the of women on list. the list (Žabljak) and “Unanimously for Rožje-Brotherly and Truthfully forward” (Rožaje) did aclausespect regarding number the of women present on list. the Moreover, DF-SNP the Front People’s and Socialist Party) (inPlav) and Albanians for to failed re Bar(inBar)all - and Reconciliation Party), Albanian Alternative, Party), DF-SNP BS (Bosniak (Democratic Indeed, Democratic Party SDP the of (Social Montenegro) and SPP (inRožaje), SPP (Justice ofber electoral lists didnot prescribed minimum the meet number and layout of women. In spite of obligations legal to provisions respect concerning women’s representation, a num- Petnjica and Tuzi earlier year. inthe of Constitutional the had differed Court in response to similar objections to elections in of electoral the process. Moreover, situation this was exacerbated by that fact the actions the obligation to protect citizens’ active and passive voting rights, stimulated increased distrust nature. This decision, accompanied growingby media attacks on agenciesrightwiththe and that it for was not voters necessary toparticipation confirmtheir withtheirballotthe sig- in completedhad been inPodgorica. By amajority of votes, Constitutional the adjudged Court tutional concerning Court Civic the Alliance for Changes afterthe city assembly elections elections Thewere local marked by asignificantdecision made the by Montenegrin Consti- edited websites. to increase transparency the essary of municipal electoral commissions through adequately information on MECKolašin’s website is not regularly updated. For reasons, these it is- nec Forall. example, Municipal Commission Election (MEC)Žabljakhas no website, the while formation regarding electoral the process, other committees while donot have awebsite at The websites of many municipal committees election do not display all the of relevant in- decision-making processes were dominated by affiliation party the these of groups’ members. municipal electoral commissions and State the Commission. Electoral In particular, their monitoring the During of electoral the process, issues were identifiedthe in work theof vlja, Plav, Podgorica, Rožaje, Šavnik and Žabljak)and city the municipality of Golubovci. capitalin the (Podgorica), nine municipalities (Bar, Bijelo Polje, Danilovgrad, Kolašin, Plje - elections, were of which executed supervision civil local the the CeMI held on 27May 2018 of results. the of InternalMinistry Affairs; and (4) media relations, public relations and live representation electoral commissions, State the Commission, Electoral Anti-Corruption the Agency and the at stations; polling the vote (2)parallel tabulation; (3)monitoring work the of municipal torate votes. This process was implemented (1) activities: monitoringseveral via procedures accreditating 836individuals to cover polling stations the 95%of inwhich eligible the - elec CentreThe for Monitoring and Research (CeMI) oversawthe monitoringDay, Election of

7 Final Report 8 CIVIC MONITORING OF THE LOCAL ELECTIONS Montenegro 2018 State Election Commission in all municipalities was 0.21%. published. The average deviation CeMI’sof estimates compared to the results released by the 45 minutes following the closure of the polling stations and soon after the final projection was publishedCeMI the preliminary projection of the results based on the realisation of the sample freedommedia inMontenegro. members opted to appoint loyalists of coalition, ruling the forms basis of the concerns about Television Director Micunovic by following Council, which the of dismissal several illegal the ofpendence The dismissal reporting DirectorGeneral byof Public the Kadija Service. and Further layoffs in and RTCG (Radio Television of Montenegro)jeopardised thealso inde - presented coalition. ruling the Uneven reporting by was apparent. media the A clear example Pink only M,which was TV averagethe of grade polling board the from on 1to ascale 5was 4.5. 66.7%evaluated work the observers, Of CeMI positively. of polling board the very Indeed, arethough they on electoral the register. of voters, such aselectronic when identification fail individualsto devices evenrecognise tions), no irregularities were identified in terms transitionthe of thevisual identification to It is interesting that elections during (and of local case the the presidential unlike the - elec elections. local the garding irregularities and references to incomplete the composition of polling boards during Unlike presidential the elections held on 15April 2018,no information was provided re- remove from site. an the observer polling board members, including of cases attacks verbal and even one effort to physically pollingThisthe at CeMI stationsobservers reporting by was poorlyreceived several by attacks verbal bers, and on presence the observers of propaganda materials). members (including of use the mobile phones, disputes verbal polling board between mem- (dominant violation of of voting) secrecy and inadequate behaviour among polling board polling boards, as well as irregularities implementation inthe of electionprocedure the Most reports referred to irregularities work inthe of municipal electoral commissions and stations during elections, as these well as majority inthe of previous electoral processes. at polling stations. irregularities These were apparent ina relativelylarge number pollingof irregularities were received by citizens monitoring and observers work the of polling boards caused by polling board members’ insufficient education training. and 50Indeed, reports of CeMI legal team The recorded numerous irregularitiesDay, Election on most which of were accuracy. voter turnout and demographic trends, thus reducing public electoral inthe register’s trust and other conditions. In practice, has this resulted inaconsiderable discrepancybetween residence inMontenegro, but have who acquired right the to votethe by fulfilling residential A significant problemthe in electoral registerthe is presence people of with claims false of informed of changes to polling stations, and is this an so issue that must resolved. be are on register the should not Numerous be. citizens have claimed that have they not been II Introduction and acknowledgements these municipalities.these Moreover, at elections inUlcinj local the on DPS 4February 2018,the vac, Ulcinj and DPS the Berane), together with its coalition continued partners to control electionsIn held and this inboth local the previous the year (Cetinje, Tuzi, Petnjica, Mojko- additionally retained position the of President the of Montenegro. year. The DPS enteredfrom electionstherulingparty coalition, leadingas thethe local and elections Thewere local soon held after the presidential elections of15 the April of same III Political context presentsIn CeMI Report, Final this an evaluation of entire the electoral process. ation established has been during implementation the of mission. this state authorities, and parties international political missions observing with whom cooper wants also CeMI to express its gratitude representatives to all of administration,election the implementation of mission this possible. to Embassy German thank the for financially supportingthe project and for renderingthe The projectwiththe was supportrealised Germanthe Embassy of in CeMI wantsPodgorica. irregularities during presidential the elections of 2018. – Presidential 2018”. Elections The project was implemented in order to prevent electoral conducted astudy entitled “Electoral Integrity inMontenegro –Winning Citizens’ Trust In accordance with nature the of its as activities, well as goals of the organisation, the CeMI on findings the the of network of andshort-term experts. observers Dayto Election and ultimately announcement the of results. the The final based was report monitoredCeMI entire the campaign election local from registration the of first the candidate (in Ukraine and Kosovo). and onobservers, three occasions CeMI’s an headed international expert mission observing pated in numerous international missions observation and short- as expert and long-term years. Through ENEMO and OSCE, ODIHR CeMI members have of and- experts partici governing board of GNDEM. ENEMO’s at for be Secretariat CeMI will following the two dem.org). CeMI’s representative of General ENEMO and amember of is Secretary the the enemo.eu.) and Network Global the of Domestic Monitors Elections (GNDEM) (www.gn- is founder the CeMI member and of afull international the organisations ENEMO (www. guaranteeing of law. rule the tank that offers regarding expertise the electoral process, fighting against corruption and corruption and Euro-Atlantic integration, has become widely as athink CeMI recognised In addition to its fields inthe activities of democratisation, humanrights, challenging of transparent, and free fair elections. strives toelectrions, CeMI ensure democratic conditions necessary the for organisation the parliamentary elections from 2001.Through its civic monitoring parliamentaryof and local of parliamentary, presidential elections and inMontenegro, local including of all country’s the country’s electoral process. Since its establishment has monitored in2000,CeMI majority the was first the CeMI organisation in Montenegrobe to foundedwiththe goal of monitoring the -

9 Final Report 10 CIVIC MONITORING OF THE LOCAL ELECTIONS Montenegro 2018 of elections of representatives to assembly the of municipality, the city the municipality, the Law on of Election the Councillors and Representatives regulates manner the and procedure vote and Voters’ elected. to be rights under Constitution the are exercised in elections. The reached age the of 18and has at least two years of residence in Montenegro has right the to 45ofArticle Constitution the of Montenegro provides that acitizen of Montenegro has who electionsof exist. local organising elections at levels inMontenegro. all No separate regulations governing issue the governing acts legal basic the manner the of exercising voting rights and procedure the of ConstitutionThe Law theand Councillors Election the on of andRepresentatives consist of framework A. Legal system and election framework IV Legal unable to electoral pass legal threshold the even inajoint coalition (SDP and DEMOS). parliament coalition. inthe URA Some parties at elections inPodgorica key local the were was marked by public confrontation Democratic the Front between and Democrat the and a joint agreement by the to not attack one another, hence of part campaign the no interest from foreign donors, including from Russia.third The thereason was absence of exceptionthe of True Montenegro (Prava Gora), Crna lacked significant resources. There was threshold of votes 3%valid second cast. The lackreason is a of financing. Theopposition, with 7% of opposition the votes were wasted on candidates that didnot reach electoral legal the and votes were wasted on that parties did not pass census. the For instance, in Podgorica about elections. Anumber local the of reasons identified. can be First, manytoo electoral lists exist Following failures their presidential inthe elections, opposition the poorly performed in also municipality.in this considerablethe between conflict municipal committees thetheand of DPS leadership refuses tolocal create acoalition with its at partners national the level due to government.in the Resistance to is model nevertheless this apparent inRozaje, where the pressure from its coalition to partners) coalitions form local with its fellow parties ruling Rozaje. In spite of possibility the of governing alone inPodgorica, (under DPS the decided Partyniak achieved significant also success winningtheby absolute majority in in base its won approximately 1,000fewer voters than previous inthe electionsBos- of local 2014.The well as independently winning absolute the majority inPodgorica, despite that fact the it that took fact the control party the of municipality the of Kolašin from opposition, the as elections,In DPS the achieved significant local the success. This wasprimarily in reflected elections. local inthe bloc of DF’s the leaders significantly influenced levelthe general of engagement this political of of alarger money laundering that was considered trial colloquially a“coup d’etat”. trials The structure, Democratic the Front (Andrija Mandic and Milan progressed Knezevic), as part and media field.Legal inthe proceedings againstthe leaders the of strongest opposition elections, campaign the coalition by ruling inthe continued parties the strongly inthe both Following of party’s ruling the victory the candidate, Milo Djukanovic, presidential inthe samethe day as inUlcinj. in holding onto its governing position municipality inthe of after Berane the elections of rangement, had aposition not party the enjoyed for along time. The opposition succeeded managed to include position the of President of municipality the ar post-election inthe - the authorisedthe representatives of entities political that have same the voting rights. of total the number of members at of each levels the of electoral the administration, including commissionselection (MECs)and polling boards. decisions All must made by be amajority The electoral administration comprise:bodies the Commission,State Election municipal administration V Electoral representation. tribution of mandates are fairly inaccurate and poorly defined, especially regarding minority The provisionsLaw the of Councillors Election the on of Deputiesand that regulatethe dis - of mandates using D’Hondt’s formula). not appliedwill be census, legally process inthe but directly qualify of will distribution the distribution of mandate the individually, with number the of votes valid obtained (i.e. they condition of census election legal the of must 3%,they acquire right the to participate inthe At level, for local the of election the councillors on minority the list, shouldthe none fulfil latestthe census data. with aparticipation of up to 15%of total the population constituency, inthe according to members of minority a certain group, such as of minority a certain national community, positive discriminationparagraph 94, in defined Article 2, the item electoral lists 1, uses of The statutory census election differentlyis defined for minority populations. The right of allocation of seats. The electoral lists must receive at least 3% the valid of votes in order participateto the in includes only lists that those envisaged the exceed electoral census. legal of census election legal the of 3%.In process the of distribution the of mandates, method this For mandates, allocation the of party political D’Hondt’s formula application with the is used of less the represented gender dates, and that on eachelectoral list, at least one infour candidates must arepresentative be lessthe represented gender must present be on electoral the list by at least 30%of candi the - Pursuant 39aof to Article of Law on the Councillors Election the and Members of Parliament, are and closed blocked without possibility the of preferential voting. In Montenegro, proportional aparty-list representation system is applied. Candidate lists B. Election system Electronic Media and Law the on of Public Montenegro. Broadcasting Services Parties. Moreover, laws field inthe of broadcasting are important,also includingLawthe on Political Entities and Campaigns, Electoral Law the on Roll and Electoral Law the on Political tatives, of set the laws field in the of electoral legislation include:also Law the on Financing In addition to Constitution the and Law the of on Election Councillors the and Represen- rights and other issues of importance for organisation the and conduct the of elections. determining voting results and distribution the of mandates, and protection the of voting It covers also organisation, the composition and competence of administration, election the capital city and royal the capital and to becoming acouncillor Parliament inthe of Montenegro. 11 Final Report 12 CIVIC MONITORING OF THE LOCAL ELECTIONS Montenegro 2018 composition electoral list. The electoral committee has every should comprise a president before of beginning the vote. the In addition, right the to representative the enlarged inthe The boardelectoral has a president and four members. Their obligations are determined through adequately regulated sites. to-date information. For reasons these to improve it is necessary transparency the of MECs notOIK does Žabljak, which have its own website at and all, MOK Kolašin, lacks which up- website that lacks prerequisite the information for process. election the Examples include A problem operations inthe of MECsis that many either donot have awebsite or have a on motion the of majority. ruling the proposal of parliamentary the opposition, one of whom as Secretary. acts They are elected of council seats previous inthe elections. Two members of MECare the appointed on the A candidate for is appointed apolitical party as President by with largest the party the number authorised representative of submitter the of electoral the list. MECs consist of apresident and four members of permanent the composition, as well as one to have a person present polling station in the increases, in violation of electoral legislation. members of accreditation polling boards the fail to carry at polling station, the potential the accreditationsof polling boards the to carry at polling stations. Should president the and for policies the polling stations have underlined obligations the of presidents the and members mission, have noted that regarding neither rules the procedures the of boards polling the nor attending while observers, meetings the and reading material the of State the - Com Election complete transparency body’s inthis operations has yet achieved. to Furthermore, be our other Onthe with media. the hand, sessions remain to and media, the closed for reason, this managers for electoral the process and has thus achieved some progress incommunicating It is commendable that State the Commission Election has appointed public relations (PR) Statethe Commission, Election it viewing as dysfunctional. torefused propose arepresentative, instead insisting on reform the of current the of model the legally prescribed requirements.fulfil Organisations in monitoringelection specialising requestthe of administrative the board, Parliament the a candidate elected not does who shortlist of representatives of society, civil non-governmental the and sector universities. At NGO Civic Alliance, Zoran Vujicic, as amember of State the Commission Election from a Parliamentthe of Montenegro acoordinator elected of programme the of of law rule in untilsector 27April vacancies 2018,even though were several announced. date, Onthis From State 2016,the Commission Election didnot include representatives from civil the legislation issues. society, non-governmental the and sector universities, inelectoral and is an who expert afterthe previously conducted public competition,from amongthe representatives of civil proposal of Working the of Parliament the Body responsible for and election appointment composition of State the Commission Election must appointed be by Assembly, the on the another minority nation or aminority national community. Amember of permanent the nent member of permanent the composition, and his or her deputy should amember of be has received highest the number of votes previous inthe elections, is appointed- as aperma representation of members of aminority group or aminority national community, and who representative of , the that is, submitter the of electoral the list for authentic the of whom as Secretary, acts are appointed on proposal the of parliamentary the opposition. A Commission are appointed on proposal the of a parliamentary majority. Four members, one following public tender. Four members of permanent the composition of State the Election tion of Working the of Parliament the Body responsible for elections and appointments, list submitters. The President is appointed the by Parliament of Montenegro the on sugges- members of permanent the composition and one authorised representative of electoral the The CommissionState Election permanent is a consistingbody the of President and ten number and schedule of women electoral inthe lists. electoral lists wereseveral registered didnot provisions though even they respect on the Another significant problemwhen registeringelectionsthat was local electoral liststhese in Bijelo Polje, Plav, Rozaje and Golubovci. repeated. Examples elections held on local inthe 27May 2018were noted inPodgorica, Bar, signature abuses and receiving money that intended had been to register electoral the list is entities that lack sufficientlydeveloped infrastructurepolitical applying for elections using noted that one list to failed “defend” its signatures. In way, this practice of the political certain by opponents rules political the signatures incollecting elections, our for observers local these application was not activated. Although electoral the lists to failed highlight any violation of abuse signatures. incollecting However, registering when elections inMay local 2018,the application solution was agood and mechanisms that further should created be to prevent and way inthis initiated aprocedure to protect rights. their Thedata demonstratethat the hundredSeveral citizens reported abuse the of registration their numbers to prosecution, the cation voters whether to verify supported candidate their for President the of Montenegro. on charges of abuse the of signatures, established at its meeting on 9March 2018an appli - First, signatures collecting for registering electoral the list. The Commission,State Election at municipalobservers the commissions election two problematic observed situations. in accordance with Law the on of Election the Councillors and Deputies. Nevertheless, our The registration of electoral lists electionsfor in local May 2018was generally undertaken VI Registration lists of electoral to day the for specified the election. pollingboardThe forpollingeach station shouldbe appointed laterno than days 10 prior representatives of that are party appointed. If there is only one opposition in relevantthe political party municipal parliament, two largest number of votes. of mandates previous inthe and election, of case inthe same the number of mandates, the opposition respective inthe parliament parties political received who largest the number A permanent member of polling the board is obligated to appoint one representative of two parliament of municipality. the proposalthe of party, apolitical that is, acoalition that has amajority appropriate inthe In permanent the composition of polling the board, two members should appointed be on commission.election representatives for President of polling board the should by determined be municipal the ipal parliament, and polling stations the would party political nominate where aparticular polling the boards must proportional be to representation the of council seats munic in the - In represented party each political relevant in the parliament, number the of chairpersons of of submitter the of electoral the list. and four members of permanent the composition, as well as one authorised representative 13 Final Report 14 CIVIC MONITORING OF THE LOCAL ELECTIONS Montenegro 2018 VII Registration of voters litical Entities and Campaigns, Election which 2 stipulates in Article that an election campaign The campaignelectoral theduring electoral process is regulatedLaw the by on Financing Po- campaign A Electoral campaign VIII Electoral of electoral the roll.accuracy in voter turnout relative to demographic trends, hence diminishing public confidencethe in and thus acquiring right the to vote. In practice, has this resulted inasignificant discrepancy residence as inMontenegro, being enabling to them (appearthe condition to)residency fulfil An important issue voter inthe list is inclusion the of people falsely who reported place their of in relation to electoral the roll afterwhichthe previous elections were held the at state level”. datathe on changes the electoral inthe roll as awhole and by units self-government of local daily newspapers issued in Montenegro and on its website anumerical tabular presentation of shall, within 48hours from day the of announcing elections, the publish inpublicly the all work is required. important This is especially knowing that thelaw stipulatesthat “the Ministry citizens claim not to have informed been about changes to polling stations, hence evenmore in order to reduce of occurrence the such situations. It noteworthy is also that numerous roll should (and eventhough they be versa), vice and mechanisms new so must considered be It is important to note that anumber of potential voters are not still included on electoral the acrossshould undertaken entire be the country. electoralin the roll. For example, control aperiodic of residence on arandom based sample However, aside from measures AFIS system, the further should to taken prevent be abuse CeMI’s published report on presidential the of election 27April 2018). AFISsystemthe rating with information asatisfactory was assessed (further is provided in of fingerprint photographs prior the to presidential elections of April 2018. The control of trol within working the group to control application the of deduplication the of photographs CeMI’s representatives attended Automated the Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS)con- DayElection according to place their of residence. announcementthe of elections and persons the that voting rights arrive at latest the on the Montenegro have who voting rights should enrolled Roll, Electoral and be inthe following order to compile personal data the of Montenegrin citizens with right the to vote. Citizens of and deaths) in a procedure including unification the and “crossing” dataof from registers in The electoral rolldatabase fromis a derived registers (register of citizenship, residence, births insight of electoral the roll, as well as any changes executed within it. monitor within election the 48hours from date the of receipt of request the through the for internal affairs. shall,upon The ministry request, electronically issue the authority to adopted provisions of Law the on Roll, roll Electoral the is kept responsible by ministry the onlya public for document serving elections and organised officially. Pursuant newly the to of data personal of Montenegrin citizens with voting rights. In addition, electoral the roll is LawThe Rollthat Electoral the on prescribes thiscarried outis through electronic collections line for submitting electoral lists. Funds amount inthe of remaining the 80%are allocated to entities political amount in the of 20% within eight days from expiration the of- dead the budget) of year the budget the when funds was These passed. are distributedequal in amounts total budget funds, subtracting capital the budget funds and state the budget funds (current year inthe ed regular the inwhich elections are held, at amount the of 0.25%of planned the funds forBudgetary financingthe costs the councillors’sof campaign election be must provid- of election’s the announcement. submit to Agency the an list for expenses advertising election within 10days from day the Entities providing advertising media campaigns for campaigns election are obligated to of eventual discount price inthe of realised advertising media the of campaign. election the politicalThe entity is obligated to submit the to Agency and announcethe cost and amount transportation costs during campaign election the period. compositioned of administration, election the overheads and general administration, and opinion engagement polls, of authorised representatives of subject extend apolitical inthe - and advertising material, representations, media advertisements and publications, public The costs campaigns of election are costs related to campaigns,electoral advertising spots sources. entities can receive funds for regular work and campaigns election from public and private sponsible for controlling financing the political entitiesof and campaigns.electoral Political The Agency forthe PreventionCorruption of (hereafter the as summarised is Agency) re- B. Financing campaign an electoral given somebeen kind of “introduction” previous inthe presidential election. butexpected, we claim can that also campaign the lasted longer it because had than expected was predominantly issues on municipalities inthe local focused where elections the were idential For election. reason, this we can state inaway elections that passed that local the Thus,election. some submittedparties their electoralbefore listseven the end the of pres- These elections were close characterised relationshipby a very withthe preceding presidential reports wereCriminal thus submitted to state the prosecutors’ offices. mutual allegations of “buying votes” on eve of the or election the on Day Election itself. primarily through of use the official vehicles personalfor as and/or as well purposes, party garding of use the public resources for of marketing political purpose the at level, local the In terms of abuse the of state received resources, observers numerous CeMI allegations re- Councillors and Deputies. immediately prior to elections. This principle is not protectedLaw the by Election the of on pre-election on silence of basis of the voters the will the the which should not influenced be Aside from violation the of principles, these entities political violated of also rule the negative manifestations at both national the level. and local forrespect diversity, and dignity. democracy Indeed, witnessed campaign the periodically attitudes and opinions that may contradict principles of religious and national tolerance and devoid of controls the and regulations of other offers media, space for individuals to express Facebook Pages to promote pledges. their This form of communication,which largelyis dition to sponsoring Ads, on posts Facebook, Google YouTube subjects political used and whereby tended to parties sponsor political inorder posts their to reach more users. In ad- Campaigning elections saw local inthe asignificant networkingsocial increase in activity, onbegins day the of and election, the ends final the election when results are announced. 15 Final Report 16 CIVIC MONITORING OF THE LOCAL ELECTIONS Montenegro 2018 Agency is currently underway, of 24hours period within legal the from of time the receipt. dures The would begin. processing and publishing of provisional thereports on website the of Serbian resulting Coalition), inan announcement by Agency the that misdemeanour proce- reports, not and was this still executed inthree cases (GBBiram Plav, Mijovic GBSasa and campaign. 21received a warning from Agency the regarding obligation the to submit interim entitieslitical submitted to Agency the 38 interim reports regarding costs the of election the concretethe was 23 May, deadline the case, given that was this a non-working day.po- The a provisional report on costs the of campaign election the fivedays Day.prior Election to In In accordance obligations, with legal entities political were required to submit to Agency the initiationthe of misdemeanour procedures. ciliation Alliance and for Serbian the Coalition Bijelo Polje), hence Agency the announced entitiespolitical this legal obligation didnot fulfil Reform (GB forBar, DF Kolašin,Recon - subjects and had funds to to collect finance spend all thecampaigns. election However, four municipalities held on 27May giro accounts 41special 2018opened through political which Political subjects participated who of election inthe representatives government in11local three days from closing the date giro of account. special the from date the of announcing final the election results, and must informthe within Agency forpolitical The entity other purposes. is obligatedgirothis to accountclose within days 90 within three days of day the of giro account. opening special the This accountcannot be used Agencythe by end the of day the following date the of confirmation the of electoral list, and entity account opens aspecial institution in the authorised for payment operations, informs For of funds as a means collecting purpose the of financing campaign, an election political a The amount permittedfundsof electionsfor heldthe local on 27 May 2018 were as follows: currentin the calendar year can represent up to 100%of its financesfrom the budgetfunds. The amount fromfundsof privatesources that politicalthe entity for collects regular work accompanying documentation. Agencythe reports their of and funds collected the spent for campaign, election the with funds areAll distributed within 10days from date the entities political when submitted to to entities political that have won mandates, inproportion to number the of mandates won. Danilovgrad Municipal- Bijelo PoljeBijelo Podgorica Golubovci Pljevlja Kolašin Žabljak Šavnik Rožaje Plav Bar ity Number entities of po litical litical 11 10 9 7 6 7 9 5 3 9 3 - public sources Determined funds from 30,000.00 27,000.00 11,265.96 19,987.85 43,527.92 28,577.00 12,488.71 5,590.25 6,625.00 5,000.00 (0.25%) 2,752.00 Determined budget funds (20%)per political entity political 1,143.08 545.45 321.88 600.00 666.26 870.56 159.72 147.22 333.33 183.47 277.53 sources that apoliti- cal entity can collect can entity cal funds from private The amountof 16,363.64 18,000.00 19,987.85 26,116.75 34,292.40 10,000.00 9,656.54 4,791.64 4,416.67 5,504.00 8,325.81 must notexceed the the campaign per the campaign The total costof political entity entity political amount of 46,363.64 45,000.00 39,975.70 69,644.67 20,922.50 10,381.89 11,041.67 62,869.40 20,814.52 15,000.00 8,256.00 100% of processed the sample won of CeMI 1.8%. same inthe municipalityparty achieved 3.9%.Albanian Alternative inPodgorica on based basis ofthe 100%of processed the sample, Albanians for Bosniak the Bargained 0.8%,while Albanians for Party Bar and in Bar, Bosniak the and Albanian Alternative in Podgorica. On pation distribution inthe of mandates over win ifthey 0.7%of total the number of votes): status guaranteed by Law the of on Election Councillors the and Representatives- (partici elections, three lists wereIn local these registered right with privileged the the to minority use X Participation of minorities deputies are women. in MECRožaje, MECBijelo Polje and MECPodgorica, fewer than 30%of members and elections, womenlocal generally consist of over 30%of members and deputies. However, 17 members and deputies, their only two women In members seen. MECsinthe can the be unacceptably numbers small of women. For example, State inthe Commission Election of Statethe Commission Election and a number of municipal commissionselection include tion Commission and municipal commissions.election This has led to asituationwhich in The obligation to represent women is not legally forprescribed members the of State- Elec did not provisions the respect concerning schedule the of women on list. the Moreover, DF-SNP (Žabljak) and Složno zaRožaje -Brotherly and Sincerely Forward (Rožaje) for to Bar(inBar)failed provision the respect regarding number the of women on list. the SDPthe and SPP (inRozaje), SPP, Albanian Alternative, BS,DF-SNP (inPlav) and Albanians electoral didnot lists still prescribed numbers the respect and schedule of women. Namely, represented gender. In spite of obligatory the nature provisions, of legal these anumber of that on each electoral list, at least one infour candidates must arepresentative be of less the represented gender present be on electoral the list by at least 30%of candidates, the and TheLaw existingCouncillors Election the of on andRepresentatives requiresthat the less 1990 at first the electionsbe multi-party heldto following thethe fall communistof regime. in Montenegro in1946.Women effectivelyrightstheir be for elected the to used first time in Voting rights and to right representative the elected to be functions were firstgiven to women IX Participation of women Considering its position, such deficiencies undermine confidence the in electoral process. resources, Agency the has to failed provide that evidence it makes decisions with integrity. tarnished as aresult.been Indeed, inspite of its substantial funds and and technical human influence ruling dominantthe of (DPS)party on its work. The Agency’s public image has decision-makingthe of Agency the for Prevention the of Corruption, or considerable the Numerous interlocutors by representatives interviewed CeMI pointed to bias political in and Agency the the Coalition), initiated so amisdemeanour procedure. obligation to submit reports was not these (GBBiram intwo cases realised Plav and Serbian a total of 39fifteen-day reports regarding the contributions of natural persons. and legal The By 24May entities political 2018,the submitted to Agency the (inaccordance with law) the 17 Final Report 18 CIVIC MONITORING OF THE LOCAL ELECTIONS Montenegro 2018 XI Election Day XI Election • • • • • 1. categories.several to report any We observed. irregularities they can group registered all irregularities under Nevertheless, using website, the networks social and public urged releases, citizens CeMI harsh attacks verbal by members of polling boards reported who irregularities. on observers enjoyed professional forms of communication and collaboration. However, other saw cases citizens. were In observers well-received most CeMI cases, by polling board members and monitoringobservers work the of polling boards at polling stations as well as from general The legal team for irregularitiesDay Election during received 50 reports fromof irregularities relatively large number of polling stations. werecases caused by insufficient the education training and board polling of members ina CeMI legal team The recorded numerous irregularitiesDay, Election on which in most A. Implementation procedures of onstations election polling relations, public relations and live representation of results. the Commission, Anti-Corruption the of Agency and Internal Ministry the Affairs; and (4) media tabulation; (3) monitoring work the of municipal electoral commissions, State the Electoral (1)monitoring activities: several via procedures at polling stations; the vote (2)parallel polling stations in 95% which of eligible the electorate votes. This process was implemented oversawCeMI monitoring the of Day, Election accreditating 836 individuals to cover the to the fact thatto fact the avoter was not registered on electoral the register or inan electronic Day, Election During polling station No. 70-Bin Podgorica was temporarily due closed polling station (No. 14inŠavnik); held) and avoter resulted permanent inthe termination of voting and closure the of the of polling station the was owner (who the of house the where elections the were being 38 in Bar and No. 14-B in Podgorica), confrontation a verbal while a member between of polling board members to agree voting on postal at polling the station, such as at No. were noted members between of polling boards the (for example owing to inability the Some resulted temporary inthe or eventotal closure of polling stations. Verbal conflicts Numerous instances of conflict verbal pollingat stations werewitnessedDay. Election on and No. 47BinPljevlja); polling board to conduct voting apostal procedure (polling station No. 94-AinPodgorica Some instances were identifiedwhichtwo in ratherthan four trustees weresent the by (for example, polling station No. 65-AinPodgorica); When receiving applications for voting, postal some applications were received at 14:30 without accreditation (for example, polling station No. 65-A); including examples of temporarily replacing members of polling board the by individuals irregularities work inthe Certain of polling boards were identifiedDay, Election during of boards polling Irregularities inthework commissions of electoral and municipal thework • • • • • 2. • • the polling station;the presencehis further at polling station, the using threats and force to remove himfrom votingthe place was not taking only verballyattacked our observer, but prohibited also in Golubovci, where members of polling board the and owner the of house the where Golubovci and No. 9inBijelo Polje. was The case mostpolling striking at station No. 92 polling boards, verballyattacked who at our observers polling stations No. 92and 97 in elections. observers’ Our local reports were poorly received very by some members of membersbetween were of polling recorded board the observers and also CeMI at the complete closure of polling stations the (No. 14inŠavnik), instances of conflict verbal that resulted temporary inthe (No. 38inBarand No. 14-Band 59-AinPodgorica) or board In and addition observers. to conflicts verbal amongpollingboard members to individuals conflictsthese verbal eitherbetween between membersor pollingthe of reports referredSeveral to inadequate behaviour by members of polling board the due No. 1inDanilovgrad and No. 71and 72inBar); (for example, polling stations No. 2,70-B, 105-B, 31-A,39-A,No. 78and 16inPodgorica, A number of irregularities referred to voter identification issuesthe in electoral register had arrived to vote with an illiterate parent; completed for ballot the an illiterate on oral person their based statement. This individuial violated was also atSecrecy Podgorica No. 82-A, where a member of polling boardthe placing it box; ballot inthe anothercitizen used person’s identificationthat take to person’s ballot theircarbefore to A significantviolation the of election procedure was recorded at Pljevlja No.where 54, a No. 97inGolubovci were not declared invalid; at same the or time voters publicly declared choice. their ballots These pollingat station ciently protected at polling stations, certain such as where two voters entered cabin the station No. 92inGolubovci). Moreover, of voting the secrecy the process was not suffi- ensure of voting secrecy the at polling stations (polling station No. 8inRožaje, polling accepting open from ballots polling the boards, and by disrespecting procedures the that stations No. 59-Aand 15-BinPodgorica), by voters publicly declaring choices, their by voting by stating name the of voters out loud during electronic identification (polling Thelargest number of irregularities correspondedwiththeviolation of secrecy the of Irregularities inthework of boards polling petent commission. election Presidentthe of polling board the didnot suspend voting but insteadthe notified com - for parliamentballot local the in Golubovci. Following objection the of some observers, forballots elections in Podgorica, local instead of one for ballot election and this another Irregularities were recorded also inGolubovci No. 88,where three voters received two toilets or water and inadequate lighting), hence polling board the considered its closure; Polling station No. 118inPodgorica exhibited working poor also very conditions (no commission made decision the not to open polling station No. 130 in Tuzi for reason. this Some polling stations lacked proper working conditions. Indeed, municipal the electoral Podgorica registered also that records on taken voter had been turnout; was inaccordance with law. the at polling stations Observers No. 2-A,21-Cand 17-Ain people had who kept track of voters; the action should this commended be it because utes Deputy the because President of polling the boardthe left building threeto warn identification system,while at station No.the 59-A voting was interrupted for five min- 19 Final Report 20 CIVIC MONITORING OF THE LOCAL ELECTIONS Montenegro 2018 • • • • • • • • • • • of voting the procedure, we can supply following the ratings: dardised questionnaires regarding organisation the of Day Election and implementation the According to findingspolling the CeMI at observers stations,of obtained according to stan- 3. • vote was accepted, indicating uneven criteria at polling stations; the voted, vote the was annulled in33.3%of as opposed to cases, 66.7% of where cases the If voter the publicly declared or in some way demonstrated for whom he or she had register were reported by 25.5%of observers. ofCases individuals failing to vote because theirname was not in copy the of electoral the records were made about voters the had who voted; phone at polling stations were reported 7.9% reported by that while 10.9% of observers, anwhich individual voted on of behalf another. of polling board Cases members using a of multiple persons (voting of family members at one and time), 2.2%identified in cases an electronic identification the 26.1% simultaneous device. reported of observers voting of acrowd at or infront of polling station the due turnout to high or in using difficulties Among irregularities the that perceived, they indicated 4.1%of observers formation the was reported by observers; 6%of CeMI A lack of positive cooperation with polling board the during monitoring the procedure problem access was to poor monitoring work the of an electronic identification device; were restricted by working poor conditions. As explained, they most the common strated understanding agood of voting procedures, opposed to who 2.2%of observers Among 97.8%claimed that observers, polling board all members demon and- observers voting boxes and insufficient copies the of electoral register (one postal the for voting); In terms typically ofreported an materials, election observers absence of CeMI portable using printing paper; for electronic identification. The most common issues were related to power supply and indicated2.9% of observers presence the of problems technical activating when adevice defined by drawing, stated 11.1% while that of observers this way; this in did notoccur reported88.9% of that observers responsibilities the of polling board members were negative response to question; this conditions to perform voting were met. The remaining 9.4% providedof observers a stated90.6% of observers that prior to opening, polling board the had checked that the The averagegrade pollingboard, the of scale of 1 on a to 5,was 4.5; regardedMost observers work the CeMI of polling boards the at good. opening as very 1.1% opened with adelay of under than 15minutes, and 0.6%were not open on time; 98.3% of polling stations the were at observers assigned opened on CeMI which time. metres from (No. polling station the observed could be 7inPodgorica); polling stations, presence the of propaganda material at adistance of only four to five 123-A, avoter photographed yet was ballot not their ballot the declared null. At some mobileused phones (for instance No. 2and 75-AinPodgorica). At polling station No. were repeated, and at anumber of boards polling President the and board’s the members Some violations of legislation election from previous and parliamentary local elections Polling work board evaluation on electoral the register. elections. This was withthenot local thecase didnot were device the and recognise they so not allowed to vote, were even though they during presidential the elections there were of cases persons with diplomatic passports that elections. of Similarly, occurrence the irregularities inlocal noticed that CEMIobservers the instances, we that believe CeMI’s efforts have had asignificant influence and have reduced elections, and had urged members of polling boards the to enable voters to vote inthese Given that we had repeatedly reported about irregularities these during presidential the voter rights. number of polling stations, voters these were not allowed to vote and were thus active denied possible to determine identity the of voters these through identification, visual at acertain by electronic the identification despite device beingthe in electoral register.Although it was that voter committees lacked auniform with people are practice to who deal not recognised she is electoral inthe register. In contrast, during presidential the elections, it was noticeable such as where electronic the identification fails a device to voterrecognise eventhough he or no irregularities were interms of seen transition the to identification visual the of voters, It is interesting to note that elections, during and local presidential the the unlike elections, noticed that polling board the was incomplete. This was not theelections.case the local at during presidential the election, at number a certain of polling stations CEMI observers referred to incomplete the composition of polling boards the elections. during Indeed, local Unlike presidential the elections held on 15 April 2018, no information regarding irregularities • • • • • • • • were present at 25.0%of polling stations the reported. from CEMIobservers which and not those belonging to any at party polling station. the non-party observers Local, More (75.0%)said that than observers there of half were CeMI observers no other local was reported 39.1%reported by opposite; the observers; 46.9%of CeMI Thelack of materialselection thelanguage in of national minorities pollingat stations wererials not customised for people with impairments; visual available inBraille. At nearly one third of polling stations the (28.6%)monitored, mate- Slightly over claimed (53.7%) of half that observers the materialselection were made did not register difficult access pollingthe station; to people with disabilities to access polling station the existed, 68.0%of while observers Approximately one-third (32.0%)claimed that observers of physical CeMI for barriers evaluation of polling board; the and vote counting, 66.7%were positive was 4.48.Among intheir observers, very CeMI The averagegrade polling of a station, scale of 1 on a to 5, theduring closing process record. to the refused sign didnot 83.5%of report observers problem; this claimed16.5% of that observers at polling stations, amember of polling board the had were or where of selected all candidates the were selected; mostmethod, the commonly inwhich none those being ballots of occurring choices the 3.3%claimedwhile opposite. the Similarity among invalid refers ballots to completing the Among17.1% of observers. 96.7%said them, that such were ballots declared invalid, were ballots inwhich orCases signed insome way by labelled voters were reported by 98.6% of polling stations monitored were at closed 20:00; 21 Final Report 22 CIVIC MONITORING OF THE LOCAL ELECTIONS Montenegro 2018 Rožaje 56.4%,Šavnik 81.6%and Golubovci 69.1%. Polje 55.6%,Danilovgrad 62.1%,Žabljak 74.7%,Kolašin 75.4%,Plav 54.8%,Pljevlja 70.5%, announcement at overall 19:00,the turnout amounted to: Podgorica 59.9%,Bar 48.8%,Bijelo 66.7%, Plav 47.8%,Pljevlja 64.1%,Rožaje 45.4%,Šavnik 80.5%and Golubovci 57.1%.At the Podgorica 49%, Bar39.3%,Bijelo Polje 46.9%,Danilovgrad 47.9%,Žabljak68.1%,Kolašin Golubovci 41.8%.At public the announcment held at turnout 17:00,the was reported to be: Žabljak 46.3%,Kolašin 46.2%Plav 34.3%,Pljevlja 43.4%,Rožaje 28.6%,Šavnik 55.4%and estimatedthe turnout as Podgorica 33.8%, Bar 26.5%, Bijelo Polje 30.6%, Danilovgrad 36.7%, 24.4%, Žabljak27.4%and Šavnik 32.9%.At addressing media the at presented 13:00,CeMI 27.1%, Plav 23.4%,Kolašin 28.5%,Rožaje 14.8%,Podgorica 21.2%,Golubovci 23%, Danilovgrad At addressing the at turnout 11:00,the was reported as: Bar 15.7%,Bijelo Polje 19.4%,Pljevlja 9.2%, Kolašin 9.3%,Plav 6.8%,Pljevlja 9.9%,Rožaje 4.3%,Golubovci 13%and Šavnik 14%. waswhich as follows: Podgorica 7.7%,Bar 5.3%,Bijelo Polje 6.6%,Danilovgrad 9.5%,Žabljak At first the addressing, media held thereat 09:00, was an assessment of turnout until 21:00, B. CeMI’s turnout and evaluation results of election mission, in all municipalities, was 0,21%. The average deviation CeMI’sof estimates compared to the results released by the State ElectionCom - covered. * In the case of Šavnik there amore is significant deviation becauseseveral polling stations were not . Serbian Coalition - Dobrilo Dedeic...... - 10. Dobrilo SerbianDedeic...... Coalition 9. Group of Citizens Mijovic -Sasa –“Winner of his Word”...... 746votes, i.e. 0seats; 8. United Montenegro -Goran Danilovic...... 1,409votes, i.e. 0 seats; 7. Albanian Alternative -Alternative Shquiptare...... 1,492votes, i.e. 1seat; 6 5. Citizen Alliance for Changes, SDP -DEMOS...... 2,985votes, i.e. 0seats; Democrats -Ivan4. Social Brajovic ...... 5,122votes, i.e. 3seats; 3. Democratic Front People’s -Socialist Party ...... 12,291votes, i.e. 8seats; 2 1 Podgorica commissions,election results the elections of were local the as follows. on material election Based from polling stations all for elections by local the municipal the C. Formal proclamation results of election . Marko -For Milacic Podgorica aFamily to Become Montenegro... -Real 2,399votes, i.e. 0 . Aleksa Becic -Dritan Abazovic Becic . Aleksa -Podgorica for 21st the Century...... 26,032votes, i.e. 17seats; . For Benefit the theof Citizens of Podgorica Djukanovic...... - Milo 48,047 Municipality The deviation results from theofficial results(inmunicipalities) ofCeMI election Danilovgrad Bijelo PoljeBijelo Podgorica Golubovci Pljevlja Kolašin Žabljak Šavnik Rožaje Plav Bar Preliminary estimate Preliminary 0.86 0.53 0.09 0.63 0.02 1.13 0.09 0.26 0.67 0.14 0.7 Final estimate (%) 0.01 0.05 0.09 0.63 0.02 1.13 0.01 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.27 199 votes, i.e. votes, i.e. 32 0 seats. seats; seats; 23 Final Report 24 CIVIC MONITORING OF THE LOCAL ELECTIONS Montenegro 2018 Agreement. Brothers, Honestly Forward!...... 514votes, i.e. 2seats; -Movement5. New Serbian Democracy for Change -For Serbian-Montenegrin the People’s Party and Yugoslav the Communist Party of Montenegro...... 635, votes, i.e. 2seats; 4. People’s -Honorably Coalition for Danilovgrad Democratic -the People’s Party, Socialist the Democrats -Ivan3. Social Brajovic -Consistently for Danilovgrad...... Danilovgrad for -Democrats votes, -URA...... 1,533 21Century i.e. 6seats; -Dritan Abazovic Becic 2. Aleksa - 1.  Danilovgrad 9. “For our City -Bijelo Polje” -Montenegrin and SPP...... 140votes, i.e. 0seats. 8. Association for Reconciliation -Svetislav Perisic -“Life Cannot Wait”..... 254votes, i.e. 0seats; -Slavko7. Serbian Coalition Fustic...... PeopleSerious for City! aSerious ...... 940votes, i.e. 1seat; 6. United Montenegro -Goran Danilovic - 5. SDP -For Life inBijelo Polje...... 1,525votes, i.e. 2seats; BestChoice 4. The - SNP Bijelo Raso PoljeNisavic...... -Dr 1,557 votes, seats;i.e. 2 DF.3. Choose Change...... Decide. 2,220votes, i.e. 4seats; Bijelo Polje for - Democrats 2,238votes, -URA...... 21st the Century i.e. 4seats; -Dritan Abazovic Becic 2. Aleksa - Winning DPS-BS-SD Coalition! -Milo Djukanovic..... Coalition 13,811votes, i.e. 25seats; 1. For of Citizens the of Good the Bijelo Polje! Bijelo Polje /LDnë MZ–DP/PD)...... (DS inCG 163votes, i.e. 0terms. 11. Albanians for Bar/Shqiptarët Tivarin për 10. “Reform” for Bar………...... ….. 194votes, i.e. 0seats; -“Clean 9.Demos Hands for Future the of Bar”...... 246 votes, i.e. 0seats; 8. Marko - Milacic TheReal Montenegro - “ForBar”...... theReal 662 votes, seat;i.e. 1 Party...... 7. Bosniak 814votes, i.e.1 seat; 6. “Democratic Front People’s -Socialist Party, “For City the we Love!”..... 1,333votes, i.e. 2seats; 5. SDP Barfor Changes -DR Draginja Vuksanovic...... 1,432votes, i.e. 2seats; Bar for -Democrats...... -URA... 21st the Century -Dritan Abazovic Becic 4. Aleksa - Novaković3. Radomir Bar” -“I Cakan ...... 2,580votes, Choose i.e. 5seats; Consistently for New Workplaces and Development the of Bar”- 3,824votes, i.e. 7seats; Democrats2. “Social -Mico Orlandic - votes, i.e. 15seats; 1. “For of Citizens the of Good the Bar. Winning coalition DPS -Milo Djukanovic...... 7,218 Bar DPS LP-Milo Djukanovic...... Coalition, 4,422 votes, i.e. 19seats; For of People the Good the of Danilovgrad! Winning Coalition! ...... 515votes, i.e. 0seats; 2,401 votes, i.e. 4seats; 788 votes, i.e. 3seats; Pljevlja. Modestly and Honestly Forward! ...... 2,467 votes, i.e. 4seats; People’sSocialist Party of Montenegro-. May Dawn the Come to Coalition- 3. New Serbian Democracy Winning, Not Dividing. Come Home We Because Have aPlan...... 3,743votes, i.e. 7seats; - Becic-Democrats 2. Aleksa Winning coalition! DPS, Coalition SD, BS-Milo Djukanovic...... 10,138 votes, i.e. 20seats; 1. For of Citizens the of Good the Pljevlja. Pljevlja 9. Party of Justice and Reconciliation -Plav Home...... Our 37votes, i.e. 0seats; Winning, Not Dividing. Come Home We Because Have aPlan...... 176votes, i.e. 1seat; -Democrats - Becic 8. Aleksa 7. Group of voters Plav-Zgjedhim Plaven...... -Ichoose 230votes, i.e. 1seat; 6. Alternativa Shqiptare -Albanian Alternative Hoti...... -Iber 203votes, i.e. 1seat; 5. The DF-SNPCoalition...... 344 votes, seats;i.e. 2 Democratic Party -Changes4. Social Act inthe ...... Winning DPS-Milo Coalition! Djukanovic...... 985votes, i.e. 6seats; 3. For of Citizens the of Good the Plav. Party...... 2. Bosniak 1,064votes, i.e. 7seats; Democrats -Ivan1. Social Brajovic -Consistently for Plav...... 1,538votes, i.e. 10seats; Plav 7. United Montenegro –Goran Danilovic...... 120votes, i.e. 0seats; 6. SDP...... 5. SD...... 435votes, i.e. 2seats; 4. Group of Voters for Sule and Mikan with Citizens for Kolašin...... 490votes, i.e. 3seats;. 3. DF-SNP...... 798votes, i.e. 5seats; 916votes,2. Democrats Becic...... i.e. -Aleksa 6seats; 1. DPS...... 1,983votes, or 13seats; Kolašin Winning, Not Dividing. Come Home We Because Have aPlan...... 525votes, i.e. 7seats; -Democrats - Becic 3. Aleksa 2. Democratic Front-Socialist People’s Party of Montenegr...... 506votes, i.e. 6seats; SD-Milo Djukanovic...... 1,303votes, i.e. 18seats; 1. For of Citizens the of Good the Žabljak.Winning coalition! DPS, Coalition Žabljak 7. SDP -Honorably for Changes -DrazenDragojevic...... 6. Marko -For Milacic Danilovgrad -TheReal Real the Montenegro...... 319 votes, seat;i.e. 1 ...... 534votes, i.e. 3seats; ...... 343votes, i.e. 2seats; 266 votes, i.e. 0seats; 25 Final Report 26 CIVIC MONITORING OF THE LOCAL ELECTIONS Montenegro 2018 in Montenegro, broadcast on two channels with national coverage (RTCG Vijesti). and TV Representatives visited shows of two CeMI key evening elections dedicated TV to local the CeMI’s voter turnout data and preliminary results were published by print all as well. media Representatives visited of public CeMI and private electronic during Day.media Election the in Podgorica as previous in the presidential and parliamentary elections held in2016. 19:00, including comparative analysis of number the of voters voted who same inthe period presentedCeMI voter turnout data at press the releases at 09:00,11:00,13:00,17:00and spotted during E-day. the as well as by interested the citizens about informed who CeMI irregularities the that they Irregularities about we which informed public the were spotted by on our field the observers stations. irregularities, voting trends, and projection the of results the afterthe closing pollingthe of andties city the municipality of Golubovci. informed public the CeMI about voter turnout, Day, Election the During held eight CeMI press conferences capital, inthe nine municipali- D. thepublic Communication with Winning, Not Dividing. Come Home We Because Have aPlan...... 152votes, i.e. 3seats; - Becic-Democrats 3. Aleksa People’s -Socialist 2. Coalition Party -Democratic Front...... 381votes, i.e. eight seats; DPS,Coalition SD-Milo Djukanovic...... 862votes, i.e. 19seats; 1. For of Citizens the of Good the Šavnik. Šavnik 9.Changes for Rožaje Better -Aida Nina Kurpejovic...... 30votes, i.e. 0seats; 8.Unanimously for Rožaje -Brotherly and Honestly, Forward...... 70votes, i.e. 0seats; -Husein7. URA Ljaic –Rožaje House...... Our 100votes, i.e. 0seats; Winning, Not Dividing. Come Home We Because Have aPlan...... 106votes, i.e. 0seats; –Democrats - Becic 6. Aleksa 5. SPP –Hazbija Kalac -Change, There’s Other No Way...... 378 votes, seats;i.e. 0 4. SDP -For Changes...... 610votes, i.e. 1seat; Democrats -Ivan3. Social Brajovic -Together for Rožaje...... 1,559votes, i.e. 4seats; DPS, Winning -Milo Djukanovic...... Coalition 3,724votes, i.e. 10seats; 2. For of Citizens the of Good the Rožaje, Party -Rafet Husovic,1. Bosniak Rožaje First inthe Place...... 6,836votes, i.e. 19seats; Rožaje 5. Pljevlja for Everyone -DrAdnan Hadziosmanovic...... 337votes, or 0seats; Montenegro, Vladislav DrNovica Bojovic, Stanic, Marko 2,207votes, Milacic...... i.e. 4seats; 4. For Salvation of Pljevlja -Democratic People’s Party, Movement the for Pljevlja, TheReal 1 presentation 58% of overall coverage media (9,713minutes) refers to television and 42%to radio 9,713 minutes or approximately 162hours of for 15days. aperiod The overall duration coverageof media on 21 broadcasting programmes was forperiod the until 25May, started. silence election the when mentionedthe law, media’s the monitoring of candidate could activities place take from 11 a which candidate list is approved, and ends 24 hours before Day. Election the Refering to liament, Chapter monitoring VII,media of campaign election the on begins day the on Under provisions the of Law the of on Election Councillors the and Members of Par the available Vijesti, Agency inthe report: Prva. TVCG, TV Pink Mand TV TV coverage analysed media of particulary fourCeMi national broadcasters TV data whose are referred to by 21of 29broadcasters, for adopted who rules coverage. media special coveragemedia during campaign the for elections of local an agency for electronic media, ternational observations of parties, CeMI’s as well as data experts election from areport on Thedata presentedthis in chapter with interestedarebased on interviews domestic and in- Rožaje, Šavnik and Žabljak) and city municipality of Golubovci. capitalthe city, nine municipalities (Bar, Bijelo Polje, Danilovgrad, Kolašin, Plav, Pljevlja, didnotCeMI conduct systematic monitoring media for elections held on local 27May in XII Media into results the on processed the based sample at any time. updated it as data as the soon were that so public the collected would given be an insight In addition, made data the publicly CeMI available on its website, www.izbori2018.me, and helping inform agreater number of Montenegrin citizens. promoting (Facebook, number the media Twitter (boosting) on social and Instagram), which ensuredCeMI that phone the number for reporting irregularities visible was highly through results at at speed the data the which arrived at CeMI’s press centre. software, These CeMI werethe directly linked to which broadcast live projections the of Two channels media (RTCG, Vijesti) TV with national coverage broadcast live conferences. three press conferences on night. election on processed the pollingBased stations, gave CeMI preliminary assessment of results the at Twitter). izbori2018.me) as well as CeMI on official the networks profiles social on (Facebook and relevantAll information about elections the were available website at aspecialised (www. The Report TheReport on CoverageCampaign Election Media – Local theMayduring page 2018, 10 1 . -

27 Final Report 28 CIVIC MONITORING OF THE LOCAL ELECTIONS Montenegro 2018 In presentation media we distinguish (1)informing between about pre-election activities indicative representative. than fully preferences of regarding parties the channel the for used advertising, are and they so more participating campaign. inthe Therefore, conclusionscanbe significantly influenced the by private television is not obligated to provide to time free that advertising parties political are structure of representation, media i.e. proportion the of paid marketing place or taking that It should pointed be out that from Agency’s the report it was not possible to the identify parliamentary opposition was less, at 8%or 26hours, 2minutes and 13seconds. Montenegro, at 47%or 31hours, 22minutes and 57seconds. Media representation of the Vijesti),TV greatest the presentation media was recorded interms of coalition ruling the in ThetheReport of Agency showedthat on TV fourPink and televisions (RTCG,TV Prva, most represented was presenting electoral the list. Graphic 1: The overall 1: Graphic media coverage during the campaign – trend May 2018,page 10. inarticle (1),paragraphdescribed 2.TheReport on CoverageCampaign Election Media – Local theduring space“ and similar) that were made for afee. The mentionedgroup includes contents for public broadcasters well other as forms all of coverage media that broadcaster indicated (“political marketing“, “paid advertising marketing blocks, advertisements and other forms of commercial audiovisual political communication, as 5 2018, page 10. presentations were performed. TheReport on CoverageCampaign Election Media – Local theMayduring took place was into divided participants all on show. the Duration includes time show reproductions inwhich of representatives the of electoral the lists. The duration the of broadcasted showswhich in more electoral lists programmescial dedicatedto elections, introducing specifically the public the ideas activities, to and opinions 4 –Maypaign 2018,page 10. promotional of activities electoral the lists. TheReport on CoverageCam - Election Media Local the during comments from different entities related the courseto the of electoral process andcan notbe connected the to a clear reference to attitudes activities, or opinions. Mentioned group excludes also reports, statements and informationservice about course the of electoral the process, electoral inwhich lists are mentioned without The informing about pre-electioncategory activities excludes reports and information related to tehnical and classified intothecategory political advertising.of ers incommercial marketong blocks, produced by electoral lists. Thistype of media representation been has The exceptions are announcements andfrom reports the promotional meetings broadcast by public broadcast- refer to pre-election of activities electoral lists, attitudes or opinions. from press conferences and other reports, framework inthe which, of informative the programmes, directly from current the affairs programme, related the to announcements or meeting reports, press releases, reports 3 2 (2) presenting electoral the list Political advertising.group This includespolitical-propaganda content broadcasted incommercial Presenting electoral the list.group This includes debates, confrontations, and interviews - other spe Informing about pre-election Thiscategory activities. includes reports and informations, primarily TheReport on CoverageCampaign Election Media – Local theMayduring page 2018, 10 4 and advertising (3)political 5 . Of these three categories,. Ofthese the 2

3 , liamentary opposition and other the parties: Below are tables displaying percentages the of coverage media of coalition, ruling the par than representation media the of parliamentary the opposition. Rožaje and representation Žabljak), media the of coalition ruling the was significantly higher coalition.ruling In other municipalities (Bijelo Polje, Danilovgrad, Kolašin, Plav, Pljevlja, parliamentarythe opposition Vijesti on TV was than representation higher media the of the In three out of 11municipalities (Podgorica, Barand Golubovci), representation media of broadcaster was than higher representation the of parliamentary the opposition by 1.1%. was municipality the of Plav, where representation media the of coalition ruling the by this RTCGthe was than representation higher media the of coalition. ruling the The exception In 10out of 11municipalities, representation media the of parliamentary the opposition to coverage media the of coalition ruling the and parliamentary opposition on four broadcasters. Thedata fromreceived CeMI theby Agency’sdata analysisalmost was identical in terms of Pink M’sTV coverage negative should deemed be as it on only coalition. ruling the focused over 80.8%inBijelo Polje to municipalities 100%inthe of Danilovgrad, Šavnik and Žabljak. cantly than higher representation media the of parliamentary the opposition, and from varied percentagesThe of media representation wereruling thesignifi TVcoalition also of Prva on in Montenegro by broadcasters RTCG1, Vijesti, TV and Pink Prva TV TV M. Media 3: representationGraphic of ruling coalition, parliamentary opposition and other parties coalition dominantruling was also (93.3%),compared to parliamentary the opposition (4.9%). Prva, identifiedwhich the on similar findingsCeMI TV representation in terms of the of presentation of coalition ruling the was 100%. In contrast, Pink Mcompletely TV favoured coalition ruling the inMontenegro, i.e. media stantial representation media of parliamentary the opposition than of coalition. ruling the fourOf the broadcasters analysed by two (RTCG CeMI, Vijesti) and TV recorded more sub - parties in Montenegro by four broadcasters TV Vijesti, (TVCG, TV Pink TV Mand Prva) TV 2: Graphic Overall media presentation of the ruling coalition, parliamentary opposition and other - - 29 Final Report 30 CIVIC MONITORING OF THE LOCAL ELECTIONS Montenegro 2018

ROŽAJE PLAV GOLUBOVCI BIJELO POLJE PODGORICA Ruling coalition Ruling coalition Ruling coalition Ruling coalition Ruling coalition opposition Parliamentary opposition Parliamentary opposition Parliamentary Other parties Other opposition Parliamentary Other parties Other opposition Parliamentary Sum Other parties Other Other parties Other Other parties Other Sum Sum Sum Sum 26,4% 33,3% 45,0% 33,5% 45,9% 53,0% 43,9% 46,6% 66,7% 13,6% 40,8% 11,1% 32,8% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% RTCG RTCG RTCG RTCG RTCG 7,5% 0,0% 100,00% TV PINK TV TV PINK TV PINK TV PINK TV Tv PINK 100,0% 100,0% 100,0% 100,0% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% M M M M M TV Prva Prva TV TV Prva TV Prva TV Prva TV Tv Prva 100,0% 91,4% 89,8% 80,8% 17,0% 92,2% 10,2% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 8,6% 2,3% 0,0% 0,0% 5,4% 0,0% 0,0% 2,4% 100,0% Vijesti Vijesti Vijesti Vijesti Vijesti 28,5% 61,1% 29,0% 23,3% 71,5% 69,6% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 0,0% 0,0% 9,8% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 7,1% TV TV TV TV TV TV TV ŠAVNIK DANILOVGRAD PLJEVLJA KOLAŠIN BAR Ruling coalition opposition Parliamentary Other parties Other Sum Ruling coalition opposition Parliamentary Other parties Other Sum Ruling coalition Ruling coalition opposition Parliamentary opposition Parliamentary Other parties Other Other parties Other Sum Sum Ruling coalition opposition Parliamentary Other parties Other Sum 30,3% 44,4% 25,3% 25,3% 66,6% 38,2% 20,2% 100% 43,2% 53,5% 18,6% 26,3% 100% 24,3% 45,3% 30,4% RTCG RTCG 100% 100% 8,1% 100% RTCG RTCG RTCG TV PINK TV TV PINK TV TV PINK TV PINK TV TV PINK TV 100,0% 100,0% 100,0% 100,0% 100,0% 100% 100% 0,0% 0,0% 100% 100% 0,0% 0,0% 100% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% M M M M M TV Prva TV TV Prva Prva TV TV Prva TV Prva TV TV Prva Prva TV 100,0% 97,5% 97,9% 97,6% 100% 100% 97,0% 2,5% 0,0% 100% 100% 0,0% 0,0% 100% 2,1% 2,4% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 3,0% 100,0% Vijesti 100,0% Vijesti Vijesti Vijesti Vijesti 76,8% 23,2% 100% 100% 23,9% 55,7% 20,3% 0,0% 0,0% 100% 100% 100% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% TV TV TV TV TV TV TV TV TV TV condemned dismissal of the Kadija and Micunovic by DPS. ruling the tance of freedom the of and media the expression, non-governmental the strongly sector duties inrelation coalition to ruling the and parliamentary opposition, as well as impor the integrity the Recalling of Kadija and Micunovic and independence their inperforming their managementthe of public the service. cameCriticism also from emphasised OSCEwhich that politics should not interfere with as key principles for negotiating Chapter 23. by European the Union emphasises (EU),which freedom media and freedom of expression Political control over by regarded coalition ruling publicthe been the has also negatively service Euro-Atlantic community. thatact freedom underminesand media to pertinent Montenegro’s integration into the tively characterised by United the States (U.S.) State Department, evaluatedwhich it as an director of TVCG, were replaced. The ongoingevents related were to nega- publicservice elections, general the director local the of RTCG, Andrijana Kadija, and Vladan Micunovic, coalition, through it which has regained control over after In public the period the service. Recent events RTCG inthe have Council represented of activities by aseries ruling the member ofelected Council, Ivan the Jovetic. NGO.the The President the of Council dismissed also wasand RTCG replaced the by newly authorities.the behindthe This dismissal issuethese members,been of according had to how Montenegro an needs independent separate public from influence political service by Vukcevic). Thesector disapprovedNGO this action of and organised a protest to highlight to comply with guidelines the for performing functions their (Goran Djurović and Nikola members of RTCG the were Council initially illegitimately removed due to an failure alleged markedhas been by significant changespersonnelthe in structure the of publicservice. Two Certainly, from it 2017until that present the should December recalled period the be day percentage participation increased, at least interms of representation of electoral the lists. was than higher number the of representing parties coalition, ruling the and therefore their moderates that fact the number the of representing parties parliamentary the opposition ship representation media between of coalition ruling the and parliamentary the opposition before parties political the elections, the RTCG which is obligated to provide. The relation- totalthe structure of representation, media i.e. data these included minutes free to advertise finding shouldbe considered with care, CeMI did notbecause have access datato regarding on RTCG was thanrepresentation 15.2%higher media the of coalition, ruling the but this According to date, the overall the representation media of parliamentary the opposition ŽABLJAK Ruling coalition opposition Parliamentary Other parties Other Sum 25,8% 74,2% 100% RTCG 0,0% TV PINK TV 100,0% 100% 0,0% 0,0% M TV Prva TV 100,0% 100% 0,0% 0,0% 100,0% Vijesti 100% 0,0% 0,0% TV TV - 31 Final Report 32 CIVIC MONITORING OF THE LOCAL ELECTIONS Montenegro 2018 XIII International and domestic observers municipal commissions election and State the Commission. Election It possible is to also of electoral rights. In administrative the procedure it is possible to appeal to competent the positiveThe regulations of Montenegro ensurethe administrative and judicial protection ANDAPPEALSXV COMPLAINTS Feniks (4). Berane for Affirmation the of Non-GovernmentalSector (MANS)(9) theand women’s organisation were Centre (1340), the observers for CeMI Democratic Transition CDT Network (329), the For monitoring the of previous the presidential elections held on 15April national 2018,the Promotion of Non-Governmental the (MANS)(9). Sector byCentre (836), the for CeMI Democratic Transition (CDT) (216) and Network the for the In terms of official the domestic observers, authority to monitor the elections wasreceived B. Domestic observers of Kosovo and (seven), NGO the Silba (24). Embassythe of Commission (one), Canada in Serbia Election Central ofthe Republic the Kingdomthe of Netherlands the State (1),the Commission Election of Macedonia (four), Europe (18),European Parliament (14),U.S. Embassy inMontenegro Embassy (21)the of of presidential the elections (15 April, 2018) included OSCE (93), ODIHR of (154) Council According to data the concerning State the Commission, Election international observers ropean Union (18). Union Delegation to Montenegro as well as Embassies the of Member the States of Eu the - International of elections include these observers U.S. the Embassy (19)and European the A. International observers order at polling station the regarding or rules work the of administration election the body. of person the to whom it is issued, ifindividual the not on does rules maintaining respect the of management election the posal authority, revoke authorisation the or identificationcard presence at of polling observers station. the The CommissionState Election may, the at pro- administrationelection the The electoral committee bodies. mentionshall the in recordthe foreignthe and domestic to monitor observer course the of election the and work the of application, issues or deniesofficial authority. Election authorities are obligated to enable an application to State the Commission, Election within which 48hours of receiving the administration Domestic NGOs bodies. interested inmonitoring elections the must submit freedomspolitical and course rights the may of and election the work observe the of election sentatives of domestic non-governmental organisations registered to monitor exercise the of LawThe Councillors Election the on of andRepresentatives that prescribes authorised repre - independence of institutions all of country. this humanbasic rights and freedoms of citizens all of Montenegro, and strengthening the and and and other acts, legal thereby support enactment the of democracy, protection the of subjectsin the of electoral the process with clear and substantiated judgements, resolutions Therefore, we thathope judgesConstitutional the of leavewill Court as little doubtpossible as not certainly of help will country this strengthen of law rule the or protect electoral rights. is not amajor source of law, but inconsistent judgements of highest the judicial institutions levela higher of electoral inthe process. trust We are aware of that fact the jurisprudence important in Montenegro, bodies harmonise will practices their in future processes and ensure Constitutional the and especially of Montenegro, Court as one of most the responsible and elections inPetnjica and Tuzi, were which organised also year. this We hope that bodies, all consider that Constitutional the differently acted Court petitions insimilar regardingthe rights, additional introduced distrust has been electoral inthe process. Indeed, we must also thaton have bodies right the and obligation to protect citizens’ active and passive voting paper. ballot had the taken Through decisions,these but also by morefrequent media attacks that assessed itCourt for was not voters necessary to confirmwiththeir signature that they for parliament local the of capital. the By amajority of votes, judges the of Constitutional the regarding appeal the of Civic the Alliance for Changes afterthe completion the of elections elections were local These marked the decisionby Constitutional the of Court of Montenegro more be certainly will which word following inthe months. appeal of Civic the Alliancefor Changes and Constitutional the decision was submitted, Court of objections these were just last the two mentioned, after because that the constitutional Decisionthe of ICGG the Podgorica No. 5205/18-1of 30May 2018.The most significant complaint of Citizens’ the Alliance for Change (SDP -DEMOS -Free Citizens) No. 747on No. 746on Decision the of ICGG the Podgorica number 5205/18-1from 30.05.2018. The complaintDecision, the of Citizens the Alliance for Changes (SDP -DEMOS -Free Citizens) GoraCrna on conclusions the of OIK the objection the Žabljak, of DPS the to SIK the Sovnik The CommissionState Election received acomplaintfromDemokratska politicalparty the by MEC. the tenegro. As objection this was later withdrawn, there was basis no for legal declaration the papers ballot the polling of stations, several atpositive conflictwiththe regulations of Mon- DPS sent and withdrew then its objection to MECof the Kolašin for rounding allegedly up ofwas because rejected timidity. listthe of DPS, where as not was alleged Jelena residing Rakocevic inKolašin. This objection sameThe Commission Election Municipal received a complaintfrom the SDPthat referred to adopted and related to irregularity the of one paper ballot intwo polling stations. For example, OIK Kolašin received an objection from Demokratska Gora Crna that was entities, were which consistently at decided municipal the level. At level the of municipal commissions,election complaints several were political filed by in Montenegro. Constitutionalthe instance as final the the Court system in of protection rightsof electoral mission, and only afterwards attainrightthe to contactthe CommissionState Election or In principle, complainants the must first contactthe competent municipal com election - ofElection Councillors and Deputies or to Constitutional the Court. election commissions and State the Commission Election inaccordance with Law the on the electoral the During process, interested complaints subjects file the to relevant municipal appeal decision the of State the Commission Election to Constitutional the Court. 33 Final Report 34 CIVIC MONITORING OF THE LOCAL ELECTIONS Montenegro 2018 XVI Recommendations A. Other recommendations 2. 1. Priority recommendations members. on law-defined criteria. Political accordingparties to a similar model would assign other Commission,Election would who appointed be by State the Commission Election based mission. It to professionalise is necessary position the of President the of Municipal the vote, and instead should merely and examine observe files the the of ComState- Election should not work inthe part take of State the Commission Election or have right the to possible with emphasis on electoral law). Representatives electoral lists of certified the Commission, would which comprised be of five professionalsfrom the field of law (if professionalisation full the and depoliticisation of composition the of State the Election President It Commission. of theMunicipal to perform ensure Election is necessary Professionalisation and depoliticisation of theState and Commission the Election Comprehensive reform would regulate issues all inpast and future electoral processes. registers of permanent and temporary residence; and (7)alaw on preventing corruption. include amendments of to set the related laws: (5)an (6)alaw electronic on law; media law on financingpolitical entities andcampaigns. election In addition,the reform should presidents of Montenegro and related legislation; (3) a law on electoral the (4) a register; and members of parliament (MPs), and minor corrections; (2)alaw on of election the reform that would include adoption the of (1)law anew on of election the councillors reform.Electoral It to implement is necessary acomprehensive and inclusive electoral 3. 2. 1. To theParliament of Montenegro and decisions of the municipal and State Election Commission. MEC and polling board members that so they would not depend on political turmoil cess in the electoral material. It necessary is to more precisely and legally edit assigning way that provides clear insights for domestic and foreign observers of the election pro - term ‘monitoring the election’ the via Law on the Election of Councillors and MPs in a In accordance with international obligations, it necessary is to define the concept of the proportion of the election materials in the Roma language. centage participate in the total population. It should be mandatory to prepare acertain enjoy equal status with members of the minority community, which in a similar per members of the Roma community should be guaranteed because they do not currently Through the change to theLaw on the Election Councillorsof and MPs, equality of representatives. elected the selection of specific MPs, and strengthen the relationship between citizens and their using five preferential mandatory votes. willThis increase the influence of voters on following possibility: avoter would be able to choose acandidate from the same list The existing electoral system for local elections should be changed by introducing the - commissions C. To theState election and Commission municipal Election B. To theAnti-Corruption Agency 17. 16. 15. 14. 13. 12. 11. 10. 9. 8. 7. 6. 5. 4. number of representatives of the parliamentary opposition and that the constant com- To ensure that the permanent composition of MECUlcinj has alawfully prescribed to the implementation of the elections; MEC Petnjica) in relation to the proactive activity and publishing information critical existing websites of municipal electoral commissions (MECKolašin, MECPlužine and Create websites (for MECŽabljak and MECGusinje) and improve the condition of the Commission; Electoral State the of website official the on Increase the level of professionalism when it comes to accuracy in information publishing misuse; Special attention should be paid to the verifying credentials of the signature to avoid Offer access to the media at sessions;SEC the future SEC would present the preliminary results of the elections on the election night; Strengthen the capacity of the SEC with professionals in the field of statisticsso that in the processing of results received by the MEC; thatso all members of SEC, but also the observers and interested public, could follow the decision-making process. The tabulation of results should be completely transparent, Commission take an independent, objective, professional and transparent attitude in are accepted by all political entities and citizens, it necessary is that the State Election In order to guarantee the integrity of the results of the elections and ensure that they candidates with the highest support in elections. misuse of state resources related to both the government candidate and the opposition allReview of the details concerning the ‘stray mail’ affair, as well as other charges of submitted the list of candidates; bank account before submitting the candidacy if they begin the campaign before have Highlight the importance of the commitment of political subjects to opening aspecial Regulate the term ‘invalid ballot’ more clearly to avoid contradictory interpretations. the election silence on social networks. should make political subjects who participate in elections responsible for respecting In order to ensure full respect of the principles of election silence, we believe that the law direct election of party leadership by party members. procedures for the election of candidates for deputies and council functions, and the conditioned by the introduction into the statute and implementation of democratic State financing of regular work and campaigns for political parties should be legally data of the central electoral register. registry those voters who have fake residence. This would increase the accuracy of the be introduced, as well asan institute for field assessment in order to removefrom the an efficient means of removing ineligible persons from the residence registry should TheLaw on Registers of Permanent and Temporary Residence should be changed and aspects of the voting board’s work would be thoroughly regulated by law. It necessary is to change the Law on the Election of Councillors and MPs that so all 35 Final Report 36 CIVIC MONITORING OF THE LOCAL ELECTIONS Montenegro 2018 E. To prosecutors and courts D. To of Internal theMinistry Affairs 30. 29. 28. 27. 26. 25. 24. 23. 22. 21. 20. 19. 18. in the electoral process to avoid legal insecurity. Equalise the practices of the Constitutional Court of Montenegro in deciding on appeals processes; Process charges for violating electoral rights more quickly than in previous electoral to control the electoral register following the model of the 2016parliamentary elections. Provide accredited NGO observers who are specialised in monitoring elections in order refused because they are not on the electoral register; who, eventhough they have avalid IDcard and meet all of the conditions to vote, are commissions and the Ministry of Internal Affairs to reduce the number of citizen appeals Improve cooperation between the State Election Commission, the municipal election voters mistakenly being in the electoral register; Create new mechanisms to further improve the voter list in order to minimise cases of territory of Montenegro, in order to reduce abuse; Work on the periodic control of the resident register based on arandom sample of the board on banning the of use mobile phones at the polling station. It necessary is to work on the education of the President and members of the polling of the polling boards; highlighted in the rules on the work of polling boards, nor in the manual for the training board to accreditation carry at the polling station because this obligation neither is During training, emphasise the obligation of the President and members of the polling identification voteusingto visual identification device the of voters; Allow people who have adiplomatic passport or who are not recognised by the electronic are not recognised by the electronic identification device; Equalise the practices of the polling board on the matter of treating individuals who determine by the Law on the Election of Councillors and MPs; to avoid situations where apolling board consists of four members and not five, as Highlight to the polling boards the importance of working in full composition in order or find other polling stations) to avoid voting outside the ballot site; Improve conditions at the polling stations for people with disabilities (resolve problems polling boards to prevent other forms of violations of secrecy in voting; these voters with transportation to larger polling stations. Also, work on educating the and cause a violation of the secrecy of voting and economic profitability, by providing Solve the problem of establishing small polling stations that have 10or fewer voters, position of the MECTivat has the prescribed total number of members; Vladan Radunović, koordinator mreže posmatrača Teodora javnošću sa zamedije Gilić, ekspertkinja iodnose Milena Nikolić, zaparalelno ekspertkinja prebrojavanje glasova Ivana Vujović, zaparalelno ekspertkinja prebrojavanje glasova pravni Božović, Bojan ekspert Zlatko Vujović, zamjenik misije šefa Nikoleta Tomović, misije šefica tima misijeSastav glavnog 37 Final Report 38 CIVIC MONITORING OF THE LOCAL ELECTIONS Montenegro 2018 collected from CeMI’scollected Processed data Processed observers

Annex

Opening of stationsOpening polling Total I don’t know No Yes Total No Yes Total No Yes No Yes Total I don’t know No Yes I don’t know No Yes Female Male Yes I don’t know No Total Total Total Total Was ofvoters thenumber announced andentered into theprotocol Were there any physical barriersthat prevented withdis- people Did the polling board thepolling checkifalltheconditionsDid for voting were Were board theresponsibilities ofthepolling ofthemembers Were materials available allelection inlanguagesofnational abilities accessing stations polling (highdoorstep, stairs…)? Were by allthe ballotsstamped board? the polling Were materials available theelection inBraille? The president board ofthepolling is: defined by thedrawing oflots? provided before opening? of the polling board?of thepolling minorities? Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number of Number of Number of Number of answers answers answers answers 350 325 350 238 112 350 317 311 350 333 100 188 266 164 137 350 350 350 350 18 33 39 22 62 84 49 7 6 92.9 90.6 88.9 95.1 28.6 53.7 76.0 46.9 39.1 11.1 17.7 24.0 14.0 68.0 32.0 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 5.1 2.0 9.4 3.2 1.7 % % % % % % % % 41 Annex CIVIC MONITORING OF THE LOCAL ELECTIONS 42 Montenegro 2018 Processed data collected from CeMI’s observers polling station form for theprotocol ofthepollingboard at the Special andofficial envelopes for voting provided Joint lists electoral for voting by letter) Two from register theelectoral printed extracts (one Ballot boxes at thepollingstation station Portable ballotbox for voting by letter at thepolling Number ofneededtemplates for voting provided Total Total Number ofneededballotsprovided No Yes Total No Yes I don’t know No Yes Electronic deviceElectronic for identification of voters device for identification electronic of voters Two eTokens keys) (electronic for ofthe activation Total was NOT properly sealed was properly sealed, thesigned control ballotwas inthebox Total No Yes Was thedevice for identification electronic of voters setupsothat Were there any technical problems whendevice for electronic Were material there at allelection board? thepolling most members of polling boards ofpolling weremost members ableto seeit? Did thefirst Did voterbox? puttheballotin identification of voters were activated? Was box thepolling transparent? The ballotbox... Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No No No No No No No Number of Number of answers 350 347 350 350 350 348 349 349 350 349 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers 350 343 350 340 350 350 346 331 350 349 10 18 7 4 1 1 99.1 99.4 99.7 99.7 99.7 100 100 100 100 100 0.9 0.0 0.6 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.0 % Total 99.7 98.9 100 100 100 98.0 97.1 94.6 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0.3 1.1 2.0 5.1 2.9 0.3 % % % % % Total AVERAGE The pollingstation was notopened Total Total The pollingstation openedwithadelay ofmore than15minutes VERY BAD There were reasonable complaints thataffected seriously theprocess The pollingstation openedwithadelay oflessthan15minutes The pollingstation openedontime(7am) BAD GOOD VERY GOOD There were someunreasonable complaints There were somecomplaints that didnotaffectthe voting process There were nocomplaints Were there any complaints/remarks procedure ontheopening of the polling stationthe polling by board polling members, andwere they Evaluation station ofthepolling entered into theprotocol? Opening Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers 350 344 350 350 117 223 337 12 0 2 4 3 1 7 0 3.60 (SD=0.58) 98.3 100 33.4 63.7 96.3 100 100 0.0 0.6 1.1 0.9 0.3 2.0 0.0 3.4 % % % 43 Annex CIVIC MONITORING OF THE LOCAL ELECTIONS 44 Montenegro 2018 Processed data collected from CeMI’s observers The voting process Total Total Total Total Total Total No Total No activist Political party No Total Yes Total No No Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Yes Police officer (uninvited) No Yes Yes Did all polling board members and all observers have board andallobservers allpolling members Did overview good Did votersDid experience difficulties with physical access polling tothe Were you orisanyone elseprevented thevoting from observing Did youDid notice station near thepolling any activities campaign Did youDid notice thepresence ofany uniformed orunauthorised Were theauthorisedrepresentatives present? oflists/parties Were there observers? any otherdomesticnon-partisan (party symbols are symbols prohibited witha100mradius)?(party Were that interrupted persons electoral process? If yes,If whowas at station? thepolling persons atpersons station? thepolling of thevoting procedure? procedure inany way? station inany way? Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers 368 368 368 368 368 363 368 368 364 364 360 365 276 355 13 22 92 3 3 8 2 1 5 4 3 1 2 66.7 33.3 98.6 94.0 98.9 97.8 99.2 33.3 66.7 75.0 96.4 25.0 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 2.2 1.4 3.6 6.0 1.1 0.8 % % % % % % % % % Total Total Total No Total No No Total No Total No Total No No Total No Yes Yes Yes Yes Total No Yes Yes Yes Total No Yes Yes Yes Did youDid notice anyone to influence trying voters who about to vote for Were there tensions ordisturbances ofthepublicorder infront ofthe Did youDid notice campaign-related materials at station? thepolling Did youDid notice tensions ordisturbances ofthepublicorder? Were there any infront outputpolls station? ofthepolling Did youDid notice any otherproblems at station? thepolling Did youDid notice thepresence ofany at armedpersons the Were there any otherproblems station? nearthepolling Was there acrowd infront station? ofthepolling Was there acrowd into station? thepolling at station? thepolling polling station?polling polling station?polling Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers 368 368 368 367 368 361 368 368 363 368 367 368 363 368 368 367 368 366 368 353 15 1 7 0 5 1 5 0 1 2 99.7 98.1 98.6 99.7 98.6 99.7 99.5 95.9 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0.3 1.9 0.0 1.4 0.3 1.4 0.0 0.3 0.5 4.1 % % % % % % % % % % 45 Annex CIVIC MONITORING OF THE LOCAL ELECTIONS 46 Montenegro 2018 Processed data collected from CeMI’s observers Total No Total No Total No Total No Total No Yes Yes Total No Yes Yes Yes Total No Yes Yes Yes Total No Total No Yes Did anyDid useamobilephoneat board orobservers polling members Were there, to thispoint, any official complaints pollingstation? atthe Were there voters whodidnotvote theirnamewas because notin Was someonekeeping arecord ofthenamesvoters whovoted? Was there any group voting (several at familymembers thesame Were there voters whotriedto vote withanold(non-biometric) the excerpt from theelectoralregister for station? thispolling Were there situations inwhichsomeonevoted of onbehalf Were there problems whileusingthedevice for electronic Did someonevote toDid vote ortry more thanonce? identification of voters? the polling station?the polling time, for example)? someone else? identity card? Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers 368 360 368 362 368 367 368 362 368 354 368 272 368 339 368 328 368 274 14 96 29 40 94 8 6 1 6 97.8 98.4 99.7 98.4 96.2 73.9 26.1 92.1 10.9 89.1 74.5 25.5 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 2.2 1.6 0.3 1.6 3.8 7.9 % % % % % % % % % Total No Total No Yes Total No Yes Total No Yes Yes Total No Yes Total No Yes Total No Yes Total No Total Yes No Yes identification of voters signed twoby boardpolling ofthe members Did votersDid to signnext personally theirnameintheexcerpt from Were board ortheirdeputiespresent allpolling members allthe Was there cooperation good between you board andthepolling Were there any where cases avoter saidoutloudwhothey had Was thecontrol coupon that theelectronic was detachedafter voted for orshowed whothey hadvoted for inany otherway? (one from the ruling parties andonefrom theopposition)? (one from theruling parties Did the polling board thepolling followDid theprocedure ofelectronic Did a loss of electricity occur at station? thepolling alossofelectricity Did If theanswerIf is YES, was that ballotannulled? Did votersDid ballot? getastamped identification of voters? during themonitoring? the electoral register? time? Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers 368 359 368 344 368 346 368 350 368 342 368 351 368 349 368 335 24 22 18 26 17 19 33 3 9 6 9 97.6 93.5 94.0 95.1 33.3 66.7 93.9 95.4 94.8 91.0 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 2.4 6.5 6.0 4.9 7.1 4.6 5.2 9.0 % % % % % % % % % 47 Annex CIVIC MONITORING OF THE LOCAL ELECTIONS 48 Montenegro 2018 Processed data collected from CeMI’s observers Average Total Very bad Total No No Yes Total No Yes Total Bad Good Very good Yes Was theoccurrence andvisualidentification ofthelosselectricity Was visualidentification of voterscase ofaloss usedinthe Do you noticed any otherprocedural mistakes? Evaluation station ofthepolling of voters stated intheprotocol? electricity? Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers 368 368 364 134 227 13 19 16 19 3 6 3 4 4 3.59 (SD=0.559) 98.9 68.4 31.6 84.2 15.8 36.4 61.7 100 100 100 100 0.8 1.1 1.1 % % % % Closure of stationsClosure polling and vote counting Total Total No Total No Total Total Total No Yes No Yes Yes Yes Total No Yes No Yes No Yes Total No Yes Did thepresidentDid board board of the polling askthepolling mem- Was thedevice for identification electronic of voters packed inthe station access ofdata thecollection from thedevice for electronic identification of voters theoptionSTATISTICSby choosing onthe bers iftheybers hadany complaints anddidhe/sheenter theminthe proper state into thebox inwhichitwas delivered to thepolling Did the polling board thepolling determineDid ofunusedballots? thenumber Were there problems whileturningoffthedevice for electronic Did the polling board thepolling atDid themoment ofclosingthepolling Were there voters waiting infront station ofthepolling at Was station thepolling closedat 8pm? identification of voters? If yes,If are they allowed to vote? device screen? protocol? station? 8pm? Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers 357 357 350 357 351 357 357 352 357 352 336 352 357 345 21 12 6 1 5 5 7 6 5 5 98.0 98.3 16.7 83.3 98.6 98.6 94.1 98.6 96.6 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 1.4 2.0 1.7 1.4 1.4 5.9 3.4 % % % % % % % % 49 Annex CIVIC MONITORING OF THE LOCAL ELECTIONS 50 Montenegro 2018 Processed data collected from CeMI’s observers No answer Total Total Total Total Total No Yes Total I donotknow No Yes Yes No Total No Yes Total Total Yes No No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes electoral register, determine thetotal ofvoters number whovoted? Was ofvoters thenumber entered into theprotocol before opening Were ballotbox theballotsfrom for theportable voting by letter Was thecontrol found paper box inpolling identical withcontrol Did the polling board thepolling determineDid ofcontrol thenumber coupons printed confirmations identification oftheelectronic of voters? that were detachedfrom ofsigned theballotsandnumber Did the polling board, thepolling Did basedontheprinted excerpt from the immediately putinto theregular ballotbox it? opening after Was thechoice oneachballotpronounced outloud? Was thedecisiononvalid/invalid ballotslegitimate? Was thecontrol found paper ineachballotbox? Was thesealonballotbox untouched? paper of polling board? ofpolling paper the ballotbox? Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers 357 357 349 357 357 308 357 342 344 357 334 357 357 347 353 344 354 353 49 15 10 23 10 8 3 4 5 3 4 13.7 86.3 95.8 96.4 93.6 97.2 98.9 98.6 99.2 98.9 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 2.2 0.8 1.1 1.4 0.8 4.2 2.8 6.4 1.1 2.8 % % % % % % % % % Total No Total Total I cannotjudge Yes No Yes Total No Yes Total No Yes No Yes Total No Yes Total Total No Yes No Yes Total No answer No Yes Were there anybetween significant similarities theinvalid ballots? Were there ballotsthat signedormarked hadbeen by thevoters? Were any removed observers (kicked out)from station thepolling Did the polling board thepolling announceDid ofinvalid thenumber ballotsand Were any board unableto polling members checkaballotat their Was thecriterion for thedecisiononvalid/invalid ballotsapplied If theanswerIf to theprevious questionis YES, were thoseballots Were theprotocol signedbefore theendofprocedure? Were board ableto allthepolling members checkballots? enter that into number theprotocol? during vote counting? declared invalid? consistently? request? Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers 357 353 357 295 357 296 357 339 357 344 357 357 344 339 357 304 61 34 28 61 59 18 13 13 18 19 34 4 2 98.9 82.6 82.9 17.1 96.7 95.0 96.4 96.4 95.0 85.2 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 1.1 3.3 9.5 7.8 5.0 3.6 3.6 5.0 5.3 9.5 % % % % % % % % % 51 Annex CIVIC MONITORING OF THE LOCAL ELECTIONS 52 Montenegro 2018 Processed data collected from CeMI’s observers Total No Total No Total Total No Yes Total No Yes Total No Total No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Total No Yes Yes Total No Yes Total No Yes Did the polling board thepolling haveDid any difficultieswithfillinginthe protocol? Were any altered numbers they were after entered into theprotocol Did all the polling board agree allthepolling members Did entered withthenumbers Did youDid notice any forgeries in theelectoral register, results orthe Did all the people whoasked allthepeople Did for acopy oftheprotocol receive it? Were there any official complaintsprocess? onthe vote-counting Did anyDid board refuse polling member to signofftheprotocol? Were there any unauthorized onthevote-counting persons Were there any independent onthe domesticobservers Was acopy oftheprotocol released? vote-counting process,vote-counting except you? by board? thepolling into theprotocol? protocol? process? Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers Number ofanswers 357 350 357 352 357 357 268 357 347 357 354 357 341 353 357 342 357 298 357 345 89 10 16 15 59 12 7 5 4 3 98.0 98.6 75.1 24.9 97.2 99.2 95.5 98.9 95.8 83.5 16.5 96.6 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 2.0 1.4 1.1 2.8 0.8 4.5 4.2 3.4 % % % % % % % % % % Average Total Very bad Total No Yes Bad Good Very good Were any deprived observers ofclearoversight ofthe Evaluation station ofthepolling vote-counting procedure?vote-counting Number ofanswers Number ofanswers 357 357 346 106 238 11 5 8 3.62(SD=0.61) 96.9 29.7 66.7 100 100 1.4 2.2 3.1 % % 53 Annex