Nikolić Accuses Novović of Judicial Bias in Political Allegations

Miloš Nikolić, spokesperson for the Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS), has raised serious allegations regarding Vladimir Novović, a judge at the High Court. In a recent social media post, Nikolić claimed that Novović disclosed which members of the judiciary support the DPS and which do not. This revelation comes in light of ongoing accusations against Peđa Bošković, further complicating the political landscape in Montenegro.

Nikolić’s remarks indicate a troubling environment within the judiciary, where he suggests that political affiliations may influence judicial decisions. He referred to his conversation with Novović, stating, “He spoke to me about who in the judicial system votes for the DPS and who is against it.” This statement underscores concerns about the impartiality of judicial figures in Montenegro’s political arena.

The spokesperson expressed frustration over what he described as Novović’s “groveling praises” of the government and derogatory comments aimed at certain officials within the Democratic Front (DF). Nikolić questioned the motivations behind Novović’s statements and the implications for judicial integrity. He stated, “It is unclear who should be arrested for denouncing colleagues—me or him?” This rhetorical question highlights the confusion and tension surrounding the allegations.

In his post, Nikolić also directed a pointed query towards Novović about the delay in legal proceedings against him, specifically referencing accusations regarding an apartment and a car he allegedly received. “When will the indictment be raised against me for receiving an apartment and a car? I’m growing impatient,” he wrote. This comment reflects the broader frustrations individuals face in navigating political accusations and legal proceedings in Montenegro.

The situation raises significant questions regarding the intersection of politics and justice in Montenegro. As the DPS and DF continue to clash, the role of judicial figures like Novović and the impact of their alleged political biases remain critical issues. The ongoing developments call for closer scrutiny of the judicial system’s integrity and its ties to political entities.

Nikolić concluded his remarks with a hint of sarcasm, referencing a specific property across from Atlas Capital, suggesting that there are more layers to the allegations than currently acknowledged. This ongoing saga illustrates the complex dynamics of power and accountability in Montenegro, as both political parties and judicial authorities navigate a landscape fraught with accusations and counterclaims.

As the situation develops, the public remains alert to the implications these allegations may have on the judicial system and the broader political climate in Montenegro. The discourse surrounding judicial integrity and political influence will likely continue to evolve, demanding attention from citizens and officials alike.