Councilors in the Assembly of the Municipality of Budva failed on Wednesday to vote on the dismissal of the head of local parliament, Mr Krsto Radović. The session will resume on 29 June.
Current authorities claim that submitted proposal for the dismissal in contravention of the Rulebook, as it only has one signature instead of 17 signatures of councilors who had supported the initiative.
DPS councilor, Ms Snežana Kuč, said that the documentation had been reviewed by the Secretary of the Assembly.
What are legal consequences of such situation in Budva? Seems like prosecutor’s office will have plenty of work.
Considering that the intuitive with the proposal for dismissal was submitted regularly in the original form, with verified example as proof, that president of the Assembly put it in the proposal for the agenda and sent it to councilors, for which secretary of the Assembly was obliged to establish its legal correctness before the convocation, while president of the Assembly was obliged to request preparation of the enactment in accordance with the provisions of the Rules of procedure within three days, facts are irrefutable that there is no request for the amendments to the Proposal for the dismissal. It is particularly important that Municipal Board had no objection and failed to indicate presence of any legal shortcoming.
Furthermore, chairman of the Assembly started discussion over the proposed initiative and proposal for dismissal of the President of the Assembly without objection to its formal and legal correctness.
Any interpretation of the chairman or councilors in contravention of the Assembly’s view is not allowed.
It is also indicative that any shortcoming would escape the attention of the Secretary, president of the Assembly, and their professional logistics. It was certainly a clear intent and joint actions of several persons in counterfeiting documents which were referred to the procedure.
Submitter of the initiative couldn’t fabricate any document retrospectively as he/she offered material evidence right after alleged shortcoming was brought into light which was within a matter of few minutes.
It is clear this is all about rude political manipulation of the holders of the highest functions in the local self-government who, now faced with absence of legal argumentation, intended to mislead councilors and play out procedures and deadlines for lawful adoption of necessary decisions.
However, they only demonstrated lack of fundamental moral principles and willingness to resort to all means, even those unlawful ones, only to remain in power.
