Calls for Investigation into Disappearance of Controversial Statue

The disappearance of a controversial statue of Pavle Đurišić, which was illegally erected and has since vanished from institutional oversight, has prompted calls for a parliamentary investigation in Montenegro. Dragan Koprivica, the executive director of the Center for Democratic Transition (CDT), has urged all relevant institutions to provide precise official responses regarding how the statue, which was under scrutiny, could be photographed and documented yet suddenly cease to exist from the public eye.

Koprivica emphasized the need for transparency, stating, “We call on the members of the Montenegro Parliament to initiate a review of the actions taken by state authorities in this matter.” He insisted that the situation is of utmost public interest, particularly for a country aspiring to join the European Union.

The urgency of this inquiry is heightened by recent reports from Vijesti, indicating that the Agency for National Security (ANB) had timely informed authorities about events in Gornje Zaostro. This raises significant questions about how, despite this knowledge, the statue’s disappearance occurred and highlights the need for a clear explanation from institutions involved.

Koprivica criticized the ongoing lack of accountability, describing the scenario as one of institutional impotence. “The disappearance of the statue has become a symbol of the erosion of the rule of law,” he remarked. He pointed out that everyone is aware of the statue’s previous location and its installation, yet, according to official accounts, no one can determine its whereabouts.

He further expressed disbelief that security agencies, which regularly inform the public about monitoring extremist activities, have failed to ascertain even basic facts regarding this public controversy. “This was a massive bronze statue, physically larger than an average person, making it impossible to move unnoticed. Yet, according to institutional narratives, it has simply ‘disappeared’,” said Koprivica.

Koprivica’s concerns are compounded by what he described as a series of contradictory decisions and actions by relevant authorities. He noted that institutions often invoke their jurisdiction inconsistently, leaving the public confused about the situation and who is accountable. This confusion appears to serve a political agenda, prioritizing avoidance of responsibility over confronting radical elements in society.

Furthermore, he highlighted a stark difference in responses to various forms of extremism. When fans at a recent football match shouted nationalist slogans, the reaction from authorities was swift and decisive. In contrast, celebrations surrounding a Chetnik commander, notorious for collaborating with fascists and for committing atrocities, have been met with silence and prolonged procedural delays.

Koprivica stated, “Such double standards normalize extremism that is politically acceptable to certain authorities and demonstrate that declared values are applied selectively.” He also raised alarm over reported violence against journalists covering the statue’s story, which has been subsequently denied, reinforcing the need for a consistent and fair approach to all forms of extremism.

He concluded by asserting that this issue transcends the fate of a single statue. “This is a matter of trust in institutions, their ability to protect the public interest, and their willingness to confront extremism without hesitation or double standards,” Koprivica declared.

The case of the Pavle Đurišić statue represents a critical juncture for Montenegro, as it grapples with issues of accountability, public trust, and the challenges posed by extremist ideologies within its borders.