Montenegro remains deeply divided on a pivotal question for one of its key infrastructure assets: should the country’s international airports be granted to private operators under long-term concession agreements, or should they remain under state ownership and control? The issue continues to generate political debate, labour union opposition and legal uncertainty, with no definitive decision from the government or Parliament yet.
At the centre of the discussion is the potential concession of the two main airports — Podgorica Airport and Tivat Airport — both operated by the state-owned Airports of Montenegro. These facilities form the backbone of Montenegro’s international connectivity, serving as the principal gateways for tourism, business travel and cargo. Despite their strategic importance, negotiations on whether to transition them to private management under a concession model have stalled, and no official government resolution has been published as of early 2026.
Proponents of a concession argue that bringing in experienced international airport operators could accelerate infrastructure investment, modernisation and route development without placing the full financial burden on the state budget. In 2024, a tender process attracted interest from global airport groups, and a revised ranking list identified potential partners. However, final approval remains pending with the government and requires careful consideration of terms, valuation and long-term benefits versus retention of public ownership.
Opposition voices have been vigorous. Senior political figures and parties, including the leader of the Civic Movement URA, have publicly criticised the government for attempting to push concessions “by force” without broad political consensus or transparency, arguing that the airports are among Montenegro’s most valuable state-owned assets and a reliable source of annual profit. Critics contend that state ownership has delivered consistent returns and that the airports could continue to generate value for public investment if managed effectively.
Labour unions representing airport employees have also voiced unanimous opposition to the concession plan, contending that the long-running tender process has been fraught with institutional disagreements, procedural disputes and legal challenges. Unions argue that Montenegro deserves a transparent, legally sound process before any decision is taken, and they assert that the existing airports could self-finance necessary upgrades and expansion through retained earnings and carefully structured debt, rather than being granted to private operators under outdated tender terms. (rtcg.me)
Some local authorities and political actors have focused on how concession revenues might be shared with municipalities hosting the airports, highlighting proposed legislative changes to ensure that a proportion of concession fees would directly support local infrastructure projects. This approach aims to align any future concession framework more closely with regional development strategies.
The European Union, for its part, has indicated that decisions about the airports’ governance model fall strictly within Montenegro’s national competence, without prescribing a preferred path toward concession or continued state management. EU representatives have emphasised the importance of market-based practices and legal compliance, but have refrained from advocating for specific ownership structures.
Economists and aviation experts observing the debate note that the revenue potential and strategic value of the airports — including their role in supporting tourism, foreign direct investment and regional connectivity — mean that any ownership decision will have long-term implications for Montenegro’s fiscal position and economic competitiveness. Whether managed by a global operator with access to capital and expertise or kept under state control with domestic reinvestment, the governance model chosen will shape the airports’ development trajectory for decades.
The absence of a final decision has kept the issue alive in political discourse and public opinion, with some lawmakers calling for the Parliament to become the decisive forum for debating and approving any concession deal. As the debate continues, the timing of a resolution remains uncertain, with stakeholders across government, labour and civil society advocating for clarity, legitimacy and strategic foresight.
