The long-delayed concession of Montenegro Airports (Aerodromi Crne Gore) has turned into one of the most contentious debates in the country’s political and business landscape, exposing a web of institutional disagreements, legal battles and public disputes that have left investors, unions, and government officials at odds over the future of strategic infrastructure.

The airports in question — Podgorica and Tivat — have long been considered crucial for Montenegro’s tourism-dependent economy, acting as gateways for hundreds of thousands of visitors each year.

Yet the process to privatise and modernise them through a concession has dragged on since 2018, marked by periods of inactivity, shifting tender conditions and allegations of political interference.

The International Finance Corporation (IFC), the private-sector arm of the World Bank Group, which is engaged as an advisor to the government on the transaction, has publicly expressed its support for the Montenegrin authorities and their management of the concession process.

“I can confirm that IFC is engaged as transaction advisor to the government of Montenegro in the airport concession process. In this capacity, IFC remains committed to supporting its client in line with the highest standards of transparency, fairness, and competitiveness, and will continue to provide advice consistent with its mandate and established procedures,” the IFC press office told bne IntelliNews.

According to government statements, the concession process has been conducted transparently and in line with international standards.

Yet not everyone agrees. Opposition has emerged from both political figures and airport employees. Nebojsa Vuksanovic, President Jakov Milatovic's advisor for internal policy and economic development, has voiced serious concerns about the legitimacy of the tender, which has been ongoing for seven years.

In a written comment to bne IntelliNews, Vuksanovic painted a grim picture of the current state of the concession process, describing it as “an example of systemic risk in the management of critical state infrastructure.”

“What was conceived as a development model turned into the opposite over time. The procedure itself is extremely compromised, first of all by the unacceptably disproportionate dominance of political influence in relation to the profession. When you add to that the previous period marked by political instability and frequent changes of governments and relevant ministers, as a result we have a complete loss of strategic continuity when it comes to the future of this company. Instead of an engine of development, we got a long-term standstill and pronounced legal uncertainty.”

According to Vuksanovic, the tender has been plagued by procedural irregularities, including violations of the Law on Concessions and questionable practices such as “double scoring” of technical offers.

“Subsequent and non-transparent ‘additional analyses’, by which certain offers retroactively crossed the elimination threshold, seriously undermined the credibility of the process and made any final decision legally vulnerable, including before international arbitration instances. This is no longer a technical or tender question, but a question of the political responsibility of the state towards its own property and citizens,” he added.

The withdrawal of the French-Turkish consortium ADP-TAV — widely regarded as a reputable bidder — was another blow to the process.

Vuksanovic said that ad-hoc changes in financial conditions, including requests for one-time payments of the concession fee not foreseen in the initial documentation, “further reduced the competitiveness of the procedure and weakened the state’s negotiating position in the management of strategic infrastructure.”

The remaining bids, he argued, are insufficient when measured against the current market value of Montenegro Airports.

“These are offers based on economic parameters from 2019, which in the meantime have become incomparable with current macroeconomic conditions, inflation, and turnover growth.

“The very fact that from March this year, the renowned low-cost airline Wizzair will have its base at the airport in Podgorica and scheduled flights throughout the year drastically changes the tender conditions defined seven years ago,” Vuksanovic noted.

He also cited record financial results achieved by Montenegro Airports under state management in 2025, without significant investment: “Record revenues of €49mn and profit (Ebitda) of €17mn were achieved. These data additionally call into question the justification of accepting concession offers defined on the basis of outdated economic assumptions.”

In light of these concerns, Vuksanovic called for a suspension of the current tender and the initiation of a new, transparent, and professionally managed concession process.

The president’s advisor said that this would require a new, professional valuation of the company. A 2018/2019 assessment by the Faculty of Economics in Podgorica estimated its worth at around €140mn, and today it is likely over €150mn. Under an article of the Law on State Property, any government decision to grant a concession would therefore need parliamentary approval, ensuring both transparency and protection of the state’s interest.

“A country that aspires to membership in the European Union cannot treat strategic infrastructure as a technical issue, but as a matter of sovereignty, responsibility, and long-term public interest,” he said.

Union leaders have been equally vocal. Slobodan Martinovic, president of the Podgorica Airport trade union, urged a full cancellation of the existing procedure, calling for a “new, transparent, and inclusive discussion on the airport’s development model”. 

“We are ready to defend the interests of employees and the long-term interests of the state of Montenegro by all legitimate and democratic means,” Martinovic said, reflecting widespread concerns among staff that the tender could compromise both jobs and operational stability.

The union criticism comes amid growing legal challenges from investors. Corporación América Airports (CAAP), a Luxembourg-American company ranked second in the 2025 tender, filed a lawsuit with Montenegro’s Administrative Court, claiming that the government’s Commission for Concessions altered scoring criteria under external influence.

CAAP argued that the first technical evaluation of bids should be considered the only valid one, which would make the company the top-ranked bidder.

The company also requested that the court suspend any further action until a ruling is made, citing a legal opinion from a Brussels-based law firm specialising in EU public procurement, which concluded that the second technical evaluation breached the legality of the procedure.

The tender itself, launched seven years ago, has been repeatedly delayed due to political instability, disagreements among government commissions, and legal challenges from losing bidders.

According to the unions, the process “cannot ensure full legitimacy or adequately protect state interests” given the prolonged disputes and procedural inconsistencies.

Despite these controversies, Montenegro Airports ended 2025 on a high note. Both Podgorica and Tivat airports recorded their highest-ever passenger numbers and achieved financial results that exceeded expectations, reinforcing the argument that the airports’ potential remains strong even under state management.

For the government, the concession represents a long-awaited opportunity to inject private capital, improve infrastructure, and modernise operations.

Officials insist that IFC’s involvement ensures that international standards of fairness, transparency, and competitiveness are being upheld. Yet the criticism from Milatovic’s office and the unions indicates that trust in the process is fragile, and that any decision could have long-lasting political and legal ramifications.

The next steps in the airport concession process will test not only the country’s capacity for transparent governance and legal clarity but also its ability to safeguard strategic infrastructure while fostering economic growth.

Whether the government proceeds with the current concession, suspends it, or restarts the process entirely, the debate underscores one undeniable fact: Montenegro Airports are more than just transit points—they are a symbol of the country’s broader struggle to reconcile development ambitions with institutional integrity, economic realities, and the public interest.