Contemporary Montenegro is fundamentally grounded in anti-fascist principles and values. The current public debate on the socialist legacy somehow marginalizes and overlooks the Roma. The many emancipatory achievements of that political era are emphasized—often exaggerated—but there still seems to be a persistent lack of a well-argued answer to the question: did Roma people truly enjoy equality (with other nations and minorities), and were they granted, during the revolution, the promised status of first-class citizens? The facts confirm that the victory of the revolutionary movement (1945) did not bring them equal rights and opportunities. There was also no adequate legal, political, or educational response to the experience of extermination that Roma, too, carry from the Second World War. The cultural isolation of the Roma and racism continued on a daily basis.
This framework carried over into the advent of democracy (1990), which, in the context of the former unified Yugoslav space, was being established under wartime conditions and accompanied by numerous criminal undertakings. Instead of democracy, chauvinistic policies and practices, crime, and corruption became entrenched. Under such circumstances, there was no opportunity—nor were Roma given one—to correct injustices, halt widespread stereotyping, or ultimately improve their social and political status. Their situation significantly worsened, both in terms of poverty and exclusion from social life, as well as legal and overall security.
Today, Montenegro is finally making optimistic progress toward accession to the European Union (EU). This implies a credible commitment to fundamental rights and the rule of law. EU accession could finally ensure that Roma, along with other social groups, end up on the winning side of this historically important transitional process. We expect that reforms in the area of the rule of law and the functioning of democratic institutions—especially the judiciary—will at last become lasting. This is where we will focus our attention. Because, particularly with regard to Roma, previous institutional practice and experience in Montenegro, including the application of the law, has not been supportive. Numerous cases point to the existence of institutional discrimination against victims solely because they were of Roma ethnicity. Such assessments are supported by credible and well-documented analyses. Alongside the pogrom in Danilovgrad, in the settlement of Božova Glavica (1995), we highlight the case of the boat sinking in Bar, which confirms violations of human rights and institutional indifference toward protecting the victims.
Before addressing this tragedy and the actual response of Montenegrin state authorities to it, we briefly point to the context of the difficult circumstances at the time, for the sake of better understanding. During the war in Kosovo, the Yugoslav and Serbian authorities manipulated the local Roma population. This political abuse was rooted in their poverty, low levels of education, and especially their fear of the army and the police. Security structures forced Roma citizens, in various ways, to carry out all kinds of “dirty” tasks for them. This included digging trenches, burying Albanian victims, destroying and looting their property, and even concealing crimes and violations of international humanitarian law… All of this contributed to distrust, negative perceptions, and distance on the part of the Albanian population.
After the NATO intervention, the signing of the peace agreement, and the withdrawal of Yugoslav and Serbian military and police forces (1999), the Roma minority, as a whole, faced torture, abductions, rape, killings, and targeted expulsion from Kosovo. The earlier coercion by Serbian forces was continued by units of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA). This led to mass displacement. Thousands sought refuge in Montenegro. When attempting to settle in the areas of Bar and Ulcinj, they encountered the previously described anti-Roma sentiment, which both local and state authorities tolerated. Many Roma refugees chose to seek escape from ethnic persecution not in Podgorica (where authorities had opened a collective reception camp with inadequate conditions), but further abroad, by sea, toward Italy. Many succeeded, despite poor conditions and numerous life-threatening risks. This indicates that refugee smuggling networks from Montenegro were well developed. Italian authorities spoke of alleged human trafficking, failing to recognize the security risks faced by Roma in Kosovo. At that time, smuggling in Montenegro was not recognized as a criminal offense.
In August 1999, a boat (“Miss Pat”) sank in Montenegrin territorial waters. The vessel reportedly carried around 70 people, even though it was registered to transport only six passengers. Due to overloading, the boat capsized. The passengers—all Roma refugees from Kosovo—were being smuggled for money with the intention of reaching Italy. At least 35 people, adults and children, died. However, the exact number of victims was never determined. The bodies of the drowned were later encountered by local fishermen during their work.
Numerous and obvious shortcomings during the investigation, as well as the length of the court proceedings, clearly point to well-founded suspicions that there was an intention to cover up the case. The Montenegrin Ombudsman (2009) noted the excessive duration of both the investigative and judicial process and issued reasonable recommendations on that basis. Opposition MP Koča Pavlović, long active and widely respected for his work in human rights advocacy, spoke openly about political corruption and the intention of the authorities at the time to protect those who had assisted them in securing support within the Roma community (during elections). Participants in the court proceedings also spoke publicly and openly about the poorly conducted investigation. It was claimed that witnesses were questioned superficially, without any real intention of obtaining relevant and important information, in order to delay the conclusion of the proceedings and ensure that those truly responsible for the tragedy were not brought to justice. Among other things, the case also revealed a long-standing systemic deficiency: Montenegro had no registered court interpreters for the Romani language.
In December 2017, 19 years after the tragedy and following nearly fifteen years of trial, four individuals were finally convicted for the criminal offense of a serious crime against public safety. The sentences imposed were significantly below the legal maximum. Human Rights Action (HRA), one of Montenegro’s leading human rights organizations, assessed that the Montenegrin judiciary—which aspires to become part of the EU—had shown its worst face and extreme irresponsibility in protecting the right to life in Montenegro. “It is reasonable to ask whether such prolonged delay is a result of discrimination, given that the victims were Roma,” the NGO stated in one of its reports. Particularly striking—and institutionally even more troubling—is the fact that Montenegrin police sanctioned the only surviving passenger (a victim) from the boat in 1999, who also testified during the proceedings, on the grounds that, as a refugee, he had allegedly crossed the border illegally.
The final judgment was preceded by a 2017 ruling of the European Court of Human Rights: in the case of Ranđelović and Others v. Montenegro, the Court found that Montenegro had violated the right to life due to the ineffective prosecution of those responsible for this tragedy. The Government of Montenegro—represented first by Zoran Pažin (later Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Justice) and then by Valentina Pavličić (now President of the Supreme Court of Montenegro)—argued that the state was not responsible for the ineffective investigation and trial, and therefore did not propose a settlement with the relatives of the refugees who drowned. The trial itself began in 2003, four years after the investigation had been completed. It was restarted three times, as the investigation was repeated and the indictment amended. The European Court found that the Government of Montenegro had failed to justify the excessive length of the proceedings.
Recalling the institutional minimization of human rights violations against Roma on April 8, International Roma Day, is not accidental. It is also a unique opportunity to call for Montenegro to finally undertake the democratization of the space of memory together with minority ethnic groups, and subsequently to memorialize that memory through specific events and victims. The Roma who perished in Bar, together with our institutional, political, and civic response to them—both positive and negative—form part of Montenegro’s overall historical legacy. They deserve social recognition and remembrance. The actors of remembrance of this tragedy include the families of the victims, their friends, NGOs, and the media. In this effort to remember, they should be joined by the Roma Council in Montenegro, as the initiator, and the Municipal Assembly of Bar, as the body responsible for implementing remembrance. This would represent an expression of institutional responsibility that has been absent and delayed for decades. It would be a signal that Montenegro is changing—for the better.
Aleksandar Saša Zeković has been active for several decades in Montenegro and the region in researching human rights violations and advocating for their protection. He is a strong proponent of processes dealing with the past, as well as of memory and reconciliation policies. He lives and works in Podgorica.
The blog was written for a regional platform on Dealing with the Past. For more information please visit the Column section of DwP website.