On behalf of all 25 municipalities, the Union of Municipalities of Montenegro submitted an initiative to the Bar Association of Montenegro proposing an amendment to the Bar Association’s Attorney Fee Tariff whereby, under Tariff Item 6, the attorney’s fee for drafting submissions referred to in Tariff Item 5 in non-assessable cases in administrative proceedings and administrative disputes would be reduced from the current EUR 200.00 to EUR 50.00. This would discourage certain groups of attorneys whose practices have raised concerns from becoming involved in an unacceptably large number of such proceedings to the detriment of the citizens of Montenegro.
Namely, a certain group of attorneys and law firms collect millions of euros from local and state budgets in connection with the costs of administrative proceedings and administrative disputes, taking advantage of legal loopholes and inadequately tailored provisions in several tax laws, errors in the data contained in the Real Estate Cadastre and the Central Population Register, as well as virtually unlimited opportunities to abuse rights arising from free access to information.
The issue concerns an organized practice by certain lawyers and law firms, who obtain powers of attorney for legal representation and file standardized appeals and lawsuits—or generate them on a massive scale using specialized software developed by non-governmental organizations exclusively for this purpose.
The depletion of public budgets at the expense of citizens in connection with local property tax began eight years ago in the Capital City, through the actions of several lawyers, and over time spread even to less developed municipalities. On the other hand, the abuse of the Law on Free Access to Information, in cooperation with certain lawyers, is largely organized by non-governmental organizations that have for years presented themselves to the public as advocates for safeguarding citizens’ budgetary funds."
We do not dispute that this phenomenon has been enabled by poor legislative solutions and, consequently, their inadequate implementation. Nor do we dispute that, in many cases, the very assumption that the data contained in public registers and records, on the basis of which municipalities issue property tax decisions, are accurate is questionable, or that official documentation is often not archived and retained in accordance with the prescribed procedures, thereby creating entirely lawful opportunities for initiating proceedings and recovering costs from local budgets.
In this regard, we wish to inform you that we have already submitted to the competent ministries and the Parliament of Montenegro proposed amendments to the tax legislation, the law governing enforcement and security, and the legislation governing the real estate cadastre, as well as amendments to the Draft Law on Free Access to Information, which will prevent further abuses. We have no doubt that the competent ministries and Members of the Parliament of Montenegro will support giving these proposals priority in the legislative procedure, as this will demonstrate the State’s clear commitment to protecting the public interest.
In the meantime, we call upon you to take, on your part, the measures available to you to protect the integrity of your profession, on behalf of all those other lawyers who, for obvious ethical reasons, refrain from exploiting weaknesses in the system, which is highly commendable. In doing so, you would also contribute to protecting all of us, the citizens of Montenegro who regularly pay taxes in order to receive better-quality services and enjoy better living conditions in our local communities—benefits that, under the present circumstances, are increasingly being jeopardized. We would also recall the general legal principle prohibiting the abuse of rights, formulated by Valtazar Bogišić in the General Property Code for the Principality of Montenegro: “No one may exercise their right solely to cause harm or nuisance to another.”
