The allegations in the criminal charge are completely factually unfounded and legally absurd.

As I know from the media, the filer of the criminal charge is a certain NGO whose founder (Svetlana Pajović Musović) very loudly expresses religious and national intolerance towards believers and clergy of the Serbian Orthodox Church at every opportunity and in every way, which is a likely motive in this particular case as well.

However, I consider this and numerous similar criminal charges to be a continuation of the political persecution of the Serbian Orthodox Church and an attempt by anti-church circles to abuse legal means to create a public opinion and social environment in which, specifically and only for the believers and clergy of the Serbian Orthodox Church in Montenegro, the crime of opinion has been introduced and freedom of expression has been limited according to the given ideological framework. For the umpteenth time, pastoral sermons delivered in churches and during church services have had to be explained to police officers and prosecutors. In this way, censorship and self-censorship are encouraged in the general public, which is prohibited by the Constitution and generally incompatible with a democratic system. Indirectly but with clear intent, attempts are being made to significantly limit not only religious rights, but also fundamental human rights and freedoms for the clergy and believers of the Serbian Orthodox Church.

Contrary to the allegations in the complaint that I violated the Constitution in my speech, I believe that on that occasion I particularly strongly affirmed basic constitutional values and principles such as: the right to dignity and inviolability and respect for the person, the right to a fair and public trial, the principle of legality, freedom of thought, conscience and religion, freedom of expression and the prohibition of censorship, and so on.

Because it is precisely these values that were violated or caricatured by the Ustasha and Titoist regimes. I am sincerely surprised at how it is even possible for individuals and organizations to appear in Montenegro today in the function of protectors of their heritage.

Namely, the assessment of the Ustasha and Tito regimes as criminal and totalitarian creations of dark ideologies is based on the fact that it has been proven beyond any doubt that the communist regime of Josip Broz and the pro-Nazi regime of Ante Pavelic carried out bloody terror, through the persecution and mass liquidations of, among others, persons of mainly Serbian nationality, Orthodox faith, and members and supporters of the monarchy, that is, the Yugoslav Army in the homeland. Several hundred - by Tito's military, party and para-state armed formations - killed priests of the Serbian Orthodox Church, destroyed churches and monasteries, seized property, mass graves that have not been exhumed to this day, and decades of cultural and political repression represent the legacy of the Tito regime in Montenegro during the SFRY. Even worse consequences for the Serbian people and the Church were the Pavelic government in the NDH. Therefore, for me, it is an epochally unique criminal coalition in the context of the terrible consequences of their repression for the people and the Church to which I belong and serve, regardless of their different historical allies, ideological motives and political inspirations.

So, I repeat, since the Ustasha-Titoist system of government trampled on the values that Montenegro still inherits today with its constitutional order, public condemnation of such regimes as criminal does not constitute incitement to hatred or a violation of the Constitution, but a mere reminder of notorious historical facts and a warning of the danger of their vampirization. I will remind you that the European Parliament, based on these facts, has repeatedly strongly condemned the crimes of communist totalitarian regimes in Europe. In this sense, I consider Josip Broz to be a monstrous phenomenon, and it is incomprehensible that such a qualification of mine is taken as an insult to the official symbols of the state of Montenegro, because as far as I know, Broz is not an official state symbol, nor is his personality exempt from condemnation and critical opinion by any law. The anti-fascist, although I prefer the term libertarian, tradition of Montenegro imposes on us a personal obligation to unequivocally condemn and expose any totalitarian practice, regardless of its ideological character. Even more so if its perpetrators are shown undeserved honors in the form of erecting new monuments.

Also, the statement about General Dragoljub Mihailović as “the first guerrilla of Europe” is only a repetition of the views of the then anti-Hitler Western public opinion, which have been documented and have long been available to the public. Such a view cannot be criminally incriminated for that reason alone.

There is not a single word from the speech that could be interpreted as the abolition of any criminal or the glorification of any crime. I reject such confabulations as the fruit of evil intent and a bestial attempt at slander. On the other hand, I stand by the stated claim that among the so-called "Chetniks", that is, the leaders and members of the Yugoslav Army in the homeland, there were heroes and heroic deeds, patriotism and libertarian virtues that inspire respect, just as there are good people and good deeds always and everywhere. This is my deep conviction, which I have the right to express. Aware that every word we utter is subject first to the judgment of God, and then to the judgment of the public, I am nevertheless obliged to clarify that as an Orthodox bishop and a free citizen, I do not agree to any single-minded and ideological codification of reality or propagandistic imposition of historical truths, and I remain committed to the freedom of conscience granted to us by God and protected as such by the Constitution, as well as to the freedom of opinion and expression that today are being suppressed under the label of banning revisionism.

As for the other allegations in the complaint, of course, as an Orthodox bishop of the Serbian Orthodox Church, I will always appropriately warn the faithful people of the dangers and consequences of distancing themselves from the embrace of the Church. That is my right, but even more so my pastoral duty before God and the people. Any different position on this issue would make me unworthy of performing the episcopal service.

Finally, the content of my speech is subject to criminal liability only if in Montenegro it is considered a criminal offense to advocate for national equality, personal freedom and dignity, truth and justice, all within the framework of the law and the Constitution.

ARCHBISHOP AND METROPOLITAN

OF BUDIM-NIKŠIĆ

Source: Diocese of Budim-Niksic