The International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies (IFIMES)[1], based in Ljubljana, regularly monitors and analyses political, economic and geopolitical developments in the Middle East, the Balkans, Europe and across the world. Its latest analysis suggests that the outcome of the announced vote on constitutional amendments will be a decisive test of whether Montenegro’s political actors are able to put European integration above partisan interests and secure the necessary cross-party consensus. Furthermore, the manner in which political agreement is reached will have long-term implications not only for Montenegro’s European path but also for the credibility of the European Union’s enlargement policy towards the Western Balkans. From the analysis entitled “Montenegro 2026: the constitutional test of Montenegro’s European future”, we present the most important and compelling insights and findings.
Montenegro is entering one of the most politically sensitive phases since it restored independence in 2006. The forthcoming vote on constitutional amendments, which requires a two-thirds majority in Parliament, goes beyond the technical scope of reform and has become a critical test of political actors’ capacity to keep the country on its European course.
The planned amendments seek to strengthen and more precisely define the judicial system, including the composition and election of the Judicial Council, the functioning of the Constitutional Court and the election of its judges, the status of the Supreme State Prosecutor’s Office and the procedure for electing the Supreme State Prosecutor, as well as the alignment of the constitutional framework with the recommendations of the Venice Commission.
These reforms are the final condition for closing Chapter 23 (Judiciary and fundamental rights), one of the central and most demanding areas of Montenegro’s accession negotiations with the European Union. The outcome of the vote will therefore carry significance beyond domestic politics and will be scrutinised closely in Brussels and other European capitals. Parliamentary deliberation on constitutional amendments and the accompanying rule-of-law reforms can thus be viewed as a political litmus test of Montenegro’s European prospects, as it will directly determine the pace of the final stage of the accession process.
Prime Minister Milojko Spajić’s government (Europe Now Movement, PES) derives much of its political legitimacy from the claim that Montenegro has emerged as the most successful candidate for EU membership, with the potential to become the next member state as early as 2028.
This strategy means that European integration is not merely a foreign policy goal, but also the main means by which the government legitimises its authority domestically. Should the proposed constitutional amendments fail to pass, that narrative could be seriously undermined.
At the same time, the European Union is increasingly signalling that it regards Montenegro as the most likely candidate for the next round of enlargement. The Council of the European Union’s Working Party on Enlargement has considered draft common positions for the provisional closure of three additional negotiating chapters – Chapter 8 (Competition policy), Chapter 14 (Transport policy) and Chapter 29 (Customs union). If confirmed at the next Intergovernmental Conference, Montenegro would have provisionally closed 19 out of 33 negotiating chapters, further consolidating its status as the front-runner among EU candidate countries. This indicates that Brussels recognises the reform progress made, but also that the completion of the process now depends primarily on political decisions taken in Podgorica.
On the other hand, the opposition, led by the Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS), the European Alliance and Civic Movement URA, is seeking to frame the constitutional amendments within the broader context of strengthening democratic institutions and restoring political dialogue after months of institutional crisis. This approach is intended to underline that European integration cannot be separated from the functioning of the political system, but depends directly on its stability and capacity for compromise.
Public perceptions of the opposition’s role in this process could carry serious political repercussions, especially if it is seen as having contributed to a potential reform blockage. Meanwhile, European partners have consistently insisted on consensus as the essential prerequisite for reform in the judiciary, the rule of law and constitutional order, with the capacity to reach political agreement viewed as a crucial indicator of democratic maturity.
The experience of countries that have successfully completed accession negotiations, such as Slovenia, Croatia and Bulgaria, shows that sustainable progress was possible only when supported by a broad political consensus that rose above party divisions and short-term interests. This pattern suggests that crucial reform decisions in the European integration process required a high degree of political coordination and shared responsibility.
Should a two-thirds majority fail to materialise, the opposition may further entrench its position that major decisions cannot be taken without its involvement. Any slowdown in the European process would nevertheless remain a shared responsibility of all political actors, since in the final stage of negotiations the success of integration depends upon the collective capacity of the political elite to reach a durable agreement.
Managing the European integration process effectively requires long-term planning, timely consultations and ongoing communication among all relevant political actors. Postponing crucial reforms until the final deadlines increases the risk of institutional deadlock and points to a lack of coordination within the reform framework.
Against this backdrop, the inter-party meeting in Montenegro, facilitated by the EU Delegation in Podgorica, can be seen as an attempt to revive political dialogue between the government and the opposition amid an accelerated European agenda and the need for decisions requiring a qualified majority. The agreement reached suggests that political actors are aware that constitutional amendments, security sector reforms and key judicial appointments are all inextricably linked components of institutional stability and the continuity of the EU accession process.
The announced changes to the legislative framework governing internal affairs and national security, particularly those relating to security vetting and stronger judicial oversight of the National Security Agency (ANB), mark a step towards greater transparency and more robust civilian oversight, in line with the standards of Chapters 23 and 24.
The creation of a dedicated parliamentary committee to monitor the implementation of legislation further reinforces institutional control mechanisms and could help reduce political tensions through structured dialogue between the government and the opposition. The announced urgent election of Constitutional Court judges and an inclusive approach to pivotal parliamentary appointments also point to an effort to establish a minimum common framework for judicial reform, one of the central issues in European integration.
Securing an agreement between the government and the opposition confirms the political maturity required for Montenegro’s successful European path. However, the European Union measures progress not by the agreement itself, but by its translation into tangible reforms implemented primarily for the benefit of Montenegrin citizens. If the entire Parliament remains committed to European integration, there is every reason to expect success.
The EU has earmarked an exceptionally favourable financial package of 3.2 billion euros for Montenegro, exceeding the amount initially planned and providing a strong incentive to continue reforms. Nevertheless, preserving political consensus after a prolonged period of polarisation remains a challenge. It will be crucial to transform this willingness to engage in dialogue into a stable decision-making mechanism, particularly for matters requiring a two-thirds majority. Parliament Speaker Andrija Mandić (New Serb Democracy, NSD) has a notable role in this process: within his remit, he should encourage dialogue and help build consensus on key reforms. Its success will determine whether Montenegro can capitalise on the current political momentum in the final phase of its EU accession.
From the perspective of IFIMES, the agreement reached is an important, albeit initial, step towards building a sustainable political consensus on the European agenda. Its real value will depend on the willingness of political actors to preserve the continuity of dialogue and prevent new institutional deadlocks that could hinder the accession process.
The long-term stability of institutions can be built only through inclusive dialogue, mutual respect and shared responsibility for achieving Montenegro’s strategic goal: full membership of the European Union.
Montenegro’s progress transcends its national borders, serving as a benchmark for all Western Balkan states within the European integration process. In this context, the recent EU–Western Balkans Summit in Tivat carries additional political weight, as it can be read as recognition of Montenegro’s role and of the diplomatic efforts of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, led by Ervin Ibrahimović (Bosniak Party, BS). At a time when enlargement policy once again ranks high on the European Union’s list of priorities, developments in Podgorica are becoming an important signal for the wider regional context.
At present, Montenegro stands out as the most likely candidate to take the next step towards European Union membership. The European Commission’s indicative financial package, valued at 3.2 billion euros for the post-accession period, further underscores the strategic commitment to planning for future membership, even though the final outcome remains contingent on the full fulfilment of reform criteria. This approach is further supported by public statements from senior European officials, including European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Commissioner for Enlargement Marta Kos, who have identified Montenegro as the most advanced candidate at this stage of the process.
In these circumstances, any stalling in reforms would have consequences extending far beyond domestic politics; it would inevitably impact the credibility of the European Union’s broader enlargement policy, particularly with regard to the Western Balkans.
The forthcoming vote on constitutional amendments goes beyond a mere technical adjustment to the country’s highest legal act and has become a political litmus test of Montenegro’s commitment to its strategic direction. Its outcome will show whether European integration is regarded as a shared national interest or as an arena for partisan rivalry.
A broad cross-party agreement on reforms would be a clear sign of the institutional and political maturity needed to enter the final stage of the accession process with the European Union. By contrast, a failure to reach consensus would risk slowing integration, deepening political divisions and triggering a new period of institutional instability, at a time when European momentum is stronger than at any point since accession negotiations began in 2012.
The International Institute IFIMES assesses that the capacity to reach compromise and cross-party agreement will be one of the defining indicators of Montenegro’s democratic maturity and its readiness to assume the obligations of European Union membership. European integration cannot be the project of a single political bloc; it requires broad consensus, institutional responsibility and a well-developed culture of dialogue. The European Union has made clear that the door to membership remains open, but that the key to completing the process lies in the hands of domestic actors. This is why the vote represents a test of the political system’s overall capacity to act in accordance with Montenegro’s long-term national and European interests.
Such a scenario could weaken the opposition’s political influence to some extent, despite its efforts to position itself as an indispensable actor in the strategic decision-making process. This could lead to a recalibration of the balance of power and a potential restructuring of political alliances in the run-up to the 2027 elections.
Meanwhile, all relevant political actors are already positioning themselves for the next round of elections at all levels, scheduled for June 2027, with every major decision increasingly seen through an electoral lens.
Political dynamics are thus already unfolding in the shadow of those elections, while whoever holds power afterwards will have a place in the “photograph for the history books” as Montenegro moves towards its possible, and increasingly likely, formal accession to the European Union as a full member.
Ljubljana/Brussels/Washington/Podgorica, 8 July 2026
[1] IFIMES - International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies, based in Ljubljana, Slovenia, has a special consultative status with the United Nations Economic and Social Council ECOSOC/UN in New York since 2018, and it is the publisher of the international scientific journal "European Perspectives." Available at: https://www.europeanperspectives.org/en
