Montenegro should consider the possibility of relaunching its Economic Citizenship Program, potentially with necessary adjustments. The previous program, launched in 2019, allowed for 2,000 citizenship applications, but fewer than 1,000 met the criteria. This indicates that there is room for a renewed program to include over 1,000 new applications, according to Boyan Bugarin, an expert in immigration law and citizenship, and former coordinator of visa and post-visa liberalization processes with the EU.
Bugarin, who coordinated Chapter 24 on migration during EU negotiations, believes Montenegro could significantly benefit from restarting the program. He estimates that the initial program contributed over 500 million euros to the Montenegrin economy.
“If the Montenegrin government had decided to extend the program to reach the originally planned limit of 2,000 approved applications, the potential revenue could have exceeded one billion euros by the time it closed,” Bugarin stated.
He noted that countries like Portugal, Ireland, Greece, Hungary, and Malta have launched similar “golden visa” programs for wealthy individuals, granting them valuable freedom of movement within the EU. The investment migration industry has yielded significant profits for Europe, with participating countries earning over 21 billion euros between 2011 and 2019.
Recent EU court ruling and its implications for Montenegro
The recent decision by the EU’s highest court, allowing Malta to continue granting citizenship to wealthy investors, raises important questions. Malta’s investment citizenship program permits individuals to gain citizenship to live and work in the country with a minimum donation of 600,000 euros, in addition to real estate purchases and voluntary donations. As an EU member, Maltese citizenship provides access to work and live anywhere in the EU. However, these programs have drawn criticism from the European Commission, which argues that selling citizenship poses money laundering risks and compromises security.
In response, the European Commission questioned Malta’s investment schemes, claiming they diverge from EU law, particularly the founding treaties of the EU. Anthony Collins, the Advocate General of the Court of Justice of the European Union, stated that the Commission failed to make its case against Malta. Collins argued that EU law does not require a “genuine” or “prior genuine” connection between a member state and an individual to grant citizenship, apart from what is needed under the national law for lawful citizenship.
He highlighted that Malta had amended its citizenship law in July 2020 to include a framework for citizenship through naturalization for exceptional services through direct investments. According to the 2020 investment scheme, foreign investors can apply for naturalization after meeting a series of primarily financial criteria.
The Advocate General emphasized that the Commission must prove that a member state failed to fulfill its obligations under EU law without relying on assumptions. He stated that the “Declaration on the Citizenship of Member States” in the final act of the EU Treaty reflects the member states’ views that their concepts of citizenship pertain to their sovereignty and national identity.
Collins concluded that while a member state may require evidence of a genuine connection under its citizenship laws, EU legislation does not define or demand such a connection for an individual to acquire or retain citizenship. Although EU law may limit a member state’s sovereign prerogative to grant or revoke citizenship, this restriction applies only when the member state acts contrary to EU law.
Malta’s government welcomed the Advocate General’s positive opinion, which suggests that the Court of Justice should dismiss the European Commission’s action. The government is encouraged by the recognition of several key arguments it presented to the court.
Implications for Montenegro
If the Court’s decision aligns with the Advocate General’s opinion, the European Commission would be significantly limited in its arguments against Montenegro if the country decides to launch a new program. The Commission places great importance on the rule of law, and it would lack a strong argument against a country respecting that rule if it acts in accordance with a relevant ruling from the EU Court, which sees no issue with a state deciding how to manage its citizenship allocation.
It is also worth noting that Montenegro received prior approval from the European Commission and EU member state leaders (especially former Chancellor Merkel) to proceed with 2,000 citizenship applications before the implementation of the previous program, of which fewer than 1,000 were completed. This suggests there is potential for over 1,000 new applications, provided Montenegro presents this opportunity transparently and competently to the European Commission, assuring them that the interests of the EU and its member states will be safeguarded. The Montenegrin government should fully cooperate with the European Commission in creating and implementing a potential new program.
