Kaluđerović: Election of the rector must be a matter of academic responsibility, not a reflection of non-academic interests

The position on the method of electing the rector must be principled and consistent, regardless of who is the candidate, member of the Board of Trustees, senator or rector at any given moment. Amendments to the Law on Higher Education could provide an opportunity to establish a higher-quality model of governance at the state university in the long term – said Senior Legal Adviser at the Centre for Civic Education Snežana Kaluđerović.

The NGO is calling on members of the Parliament of Montenegro, when considering the issue of electing the Rector of the University of Montenegro at a session of the Parliamentary Committee on Education, Science, Culture and Sports, to be guided by the interests of the academic community and the autonomy of the University, rather than by the interests of any current or potential candidate or the particular interests associated with them.

- Changing the model for electing the rector is justified, and it would be important for this to be done before a new call for applications is issued. For years, we have advocated the position that the rector of a state university should be elected by the Senate, rather than by the Board of Trustees. This position did not arise in response to the current election process, nor does it depend on who the candidates are - Kaluđerović said.

She points out that any intervention in the legislative framework must be systemic, transparent and clearly justified, while respecting the procedures currently in force.

- This entails amendments to the Law on Higher Education that would change the body responsible for electing the rector before the call for applications is issued, as well as corresponding amendments to the Statute of the University of Montenegro, which requires the approval of the Government of Montenegro - Kaluđerović said.

She added that, under several different governments and through multiple amendments to higher education regulations, they had proposed that the rector of the state university be elected by the Senate from among full professors, based on a public call, the University’s development programme and clearly defined criteria.

- During last year’s public consultation on the Law on Higher Education, we submitted this proposal to the Ministry of Education, Science and Innovation both orally and in writing - Kaluđerović said.

She stressed that the Senate is the highest academic body of the University of Montenegro and makes decisions on matters of fundamental importance to academic life, including appointments to academic ranks.

- It has the institutional capacity to assess candidates’ academic credentials, development programmes and contributions. The rector is not merely the head of a large public institution, but the academic leader of the University, and that is why the academic community should have the decisive say in their election - Kaluđerović said.

By contrast, she added, the University of Montenegro’s Board of Trustees has 15 members, of whom only one third - five members - are required to come from among academic staff holding academic titles.

- Five members are representatives of the Government as the University’s founder, three are student representatives, and two represent employees. Such a structure does not provide sufficient guarantees that the election of an academic leader will be based primarily on academic criteria, while it also leaves room for political and other inappropriate influences, which we have witnessed in the past. The Board of Trustees should have a strong supervisory and oversight role, including oversight of the legality of the procedure, but it should not be the body that has the final say on who will lead the academic community. That responsibility should be entrusted to the Senate - Kaluđerović said.

At the same time, according to Kaluđerović, the Centre for Civic Education does not consider direct elections of the rector, as proposed by some members of the University of Montenegro’s academic staff, to be in themselves a guarantee of greater democracy, transparency or academic autonomy.

- Such a model raises numerous questions - from the manner in which candidates are nominated and campaigns are conducted within the University, through voter mobilization and the differing weight of individual organizational units, to potential political, interest-based and other forms of pressure - Kaluđerović pointed out.

The University, she said, is not a political arena, and the election of the rector should not be turned into an election campaign modeled on party politics.

- The key question is not which model produces the largest number of voters, but which one enables the most competent, independent and responsible assessment of candidates’ academic and development capacities. Consistency is also important. Some members of the current leadership of the University of Montenegro, including the current rector, publicly questioned the model under which the rector is elected by the Board of Trustees before taking up their current positions. Arguments concerning academic autonomy should not change in value depending on whether someone puts them forward before taking office or while holding that office - Kaluđerović emphasized.

The Centre for Civic Education, she said, is not seeking to promote any particular individual and is not advocating for any potential candidate through this initiative.

- The problem is the model, not the name. If we want a University of Montenegro that is genuinely autonomous from political and other centers of power, then the way its rector is elected must protect that autonomy in practice, rather than merely proclaiming it formally - Kaluđerović concluded.