Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2025, published 114th ILC session (2026)

Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) - Montenegro (Ratification: 2006)

Legislative review. The Committee notes the Government’s reference to the ongoing legislative reform, undertaken in cooperation with representative trade union organizations and employers’ associations, aimed at amending, among other pieces of legislation, the Labour Law, the Law on Strikes, the Law on the Peaceful Resolution of Labour Disputes, and drafting a new Law on the Representativeness of Trade Unions and Employers’ Associations. The Committee further notes from the Government’s report that a tripartite working committee has been established for this purpose, and that ILO technical assistance was provided, including through a 2024 technical memorandum on the Labour Law and a 2025 technical memorandum on the Law on the Peaceful Resolution of Labour Disputes.

Article 3 of the Convention. Right to organize activities in full freedom. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that under section 18 of the Law on Strikes, employees of the police, state bodies and public service may organize a strike provided that it does not endanger national security, safety of persons and property, the general interest of citizens or the functioning of Government authorities, and that in such occupations, minimum services must be ensured. The Committee further noted that while section 31 provides for a judicial determination of the legality of a strike, irrespective of the area of activity in which it is organized, section 18 provides for an assessment by the public authority responsible for national security of whether a strike endangers the general interest of citizens and functioning of Government authorities and thus, whether it can lawfully take place under section 18 or not. In this respect, the Committee also noted the observations made by the Union of Free Trade Unions of Montenegro (UFTUM) that: (i) the National Security Agency is a security intelligence service whose work implies the secrecy of information; and (ii) the Agency may declare that a strike endangers the public interest, and is therefore illegal, without clear, prescribed criteria, acting at its own discretion and without any possibility for the initiators of the strike to object. The Committee recalls that it observed that section 18 of the Law on Strikes also regulates the right to strike of employees of state bodies and the public service who are not excluded from the scope of the Convention under Article 9 and who, unless engaged in essential services in the strict sense or exercising authority in the name of the State, should benefit from the right to strike.

The Committee notes the Government’s indications that the current review of the Law on Strikes aims to redefine rights and obligations related to strikes, clarify relevant procedures, and strengthen protections for employees. This includes plans to introduce clearer provisions on minimum work processes in essential sectors (e.g. healthcare and public transport). The Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures, in the context of the ongoing legislative reform, to amend the Law on Strikes so as to ensure that any determination under section 18 regarding whether a strike endangers the general interest of citizens and functioning of Government authorities, and is therefore illegal, is the prerogative of an independent body that enjoys the confidence of the parties concerned.

Article 4. Dissolution and suspension by administrative decision. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that the Ministry of Labour may take a decision to delete a trade union from the register if the registration was based on inaccurate data provided by the applicant or submitted by an unauthorized person (under section 12(3) of the Rulebook on the Registration of Trade Unions and section 13(3) of the Rulebook on the Registration of Representative Trade Union Organizations). It further noted the Government’s indication that an appeal filed against such a decision does not have suspensive effect as, it does not delay the execution of the decision. It also noted that the procedure may be initiated by a registered trade union, if the registration was based on inaccurate data provided by an applicant or submitted by an unauthorized person.

The Committee notes the Government’s clarification that any trade union registered in the relevant register may initiate the deletion procedure, and that this is not limited to the trade union concerned by the deletion. However, it also notes that the Government has not provided further explanations regarding the purpose of allowing any trade union to request such deletion. The Committee further notes the Government’s indications that once the Law on the Representativeness of Trade Unions and Employers’ Associations is adopted, the relevant bylaws will also be amended, including the Rulebook on the Registration of Trade Union Organizations and the Rulebook on the Registration of Representative Trade Unions. Recalling once again that the dissolution and suspension of trade union organizations constitute extreme forms of interference by the authorities in the activities of organizations and should only take place following a normal judicial procedure that has suspensive effect, the Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures, including in the context of the current legislative reform, to ensure that the procedure to delete a trade union organization from the register (pursuant to section 12(3) of the Rulebook on the Registration of Trade Unions and section 13(3) of the Rulebook on the Registration of Representative Trade Union Organizations) includes such safeguards. The Committee also requests the Government to specify any provisions providing for relevant safeguards as regards employers’ organizations.