Montenegro’s Prosecutor Dismisses Police Abuse Case, Sparking Outcry

The Basic State Prosecutor’s Office in Podgorica has dismissed a criminal complaint in the case involving police abuse against lawyer Branimir Vukčević and Canadian citizen Momčilo Baranin. The dismissal, which occurred on February 9, 2026, is based on the assertion that the prosecution was time-barred, having lapsed in 2021. This decision has ignited criticism from the organization Human Rights Action (HRA), which cites it as an example of systemic failure within Montenegro’s judicial system regarding accountability for police brutality.

According to HRA, the prosecutor’s decision underscores a significant institutional decline and presents a serious problem ahead of Montenegro’s potential European Union membership. The case stems from an incident on October 24, 2015, when Vukčević and Baranin were violently assaulted by police officers in the center of Podgorica after a protest organized by the Democratic Front was interrupted by law enforcement.

HRA detailed that neither Vukčević nor Baranin participated in any riots or resisted arrest. Instead, officers forced them to lie on the pavement, subjected them to physical violence, and left them injured without medical assistance. The injuries were later documented through medical reports.

Despite the severity of the allegations and supporting evidence, the officers involved have yet to be identified, even more than a decade after the incident. HRA emphasizes that the case languished in the investigative stage for ten years before the prosecution was ultimately dismissed—not due to lack of evidence, but because of the expiry of the statute of limitations, a result of the inaction of the relevant authorities.

The dismissal is particularly alarming given that the Basic State Prosecutor’s Office continued to process the case for over four years after the alleged statute of limitations had already passed. The last recorded action in this case occurred in 2021, following a ruling by the European Court of Human Rights, which determined that Montenegro had violated Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights concerning the prohibition of torture.

On January 22, 2017, HRA filed constitutional complaints on behalf of Vukčević and Baranin. The Constitutional Court of Montenegro, on June 21, 2017, unanimously acknowledged a violation of the constitutional prohibition of torture due to the ineffective investigation of police abuse—marking a historic decision in its jurisprudence.

Despite this landmark ruling, the Basic State Prosecutor’s Office has failed to conduct an investigation that meets minimum European standards. Furthermore, the European Court of Human Rights determined on March 11, 2021, that Montenegro did not carry out a prompt, thorough, independent, and effective investigation, nor did it ensure public oversight of the inquiry. This failure has compounded a culture of impunity, with the Court noting that the state had not rectified investigative deficiencies identified by the Constitutional Court.

The Court highlighted that not all witnesses were interviewed, relevant individuals present at the scene were not questioned, and the Forensic Center was not involved. Additionally, it pointed out the complete dependence of the prosecution on police structures that shared the same command hierarchy as the accused officers, thereby undermining the independence of the investigation.

The European Court of Human Rights, to which a complaint was also filed due to the state’s failure to conduct an adequate investigation post-Constitutional Court ruling, clarified that monetary compensation and disciplinary action against a single officer cannot substitute for the obligation to conduct a thorough investigation. It concluded that both Vukčević and Baranin, despite receiving compensation, had not lost their status as victims.

Responsibility for this institutional failure lies with the prosecutors involved in the case—including Danka Ivanović Đerić and Slađana Španjević Volkov, who were the first and longest-serving prosecutors on the case, as well as those who became involved after the European Court ruling: Vukas Radonjic, Haris Šabotić, and Romina Vlahović. Leaders within the police administration and the Ministry of Internal Affairs also share accountability for failing to ensure the identification and punishment of members of the Special Anti-Terrorist Unit (SAJ) responsible for the acts of torture.

At the time of the incident, the Director of the Police Administration was Slavko Stojanović (2013-2018), followed by Veselin Veljović, Zoran Brđanin, and Lazar Šćepanović. The Interior Ministers during this period included Raško Konjević (2013-2016), Goran Danilović, Melvudin Nuhodžić, Sergej Sekulović, Filip Adžić, and Danilo Šaranović.

Despite the disbanding of the SAJ in 2019, its members remain part of the Police Administration without facing accountability for their actions. HRA asserts that the dismissal of the criminal complaint due to the statute of limitations, particularly in a case where both the Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human Rights have identified torture, represents a significant setback for the rule of law in Montenegro.

The organization stresses that Montenegro must ensure effective investigations into instances of torture if it wishes to uphold the rule of law and aspire to join the European Union. Merely compensating victims from the state budget—which is filled with contributions from innocent citizens—is insufficient. The European Court of Human Rights has made it clear that without individual accountability for police officers involved in torture, the risk of official abuse of power remains prevalent. HRA concludes that adherence to the standards established by the European Court of Human Rights is a critical measure for Montenegro’s EU accession.