Former Montenegrin state secretary Mirjana Pajković is at the center of renewed scandal after several new explicit videos surfaced online, some allegedly showing her in intimate or provocative situations and at least one purportedly featuring fugitive Nikola Drecun, wanted for a bombing in Cetinje that left two dead and three injured in 2024. Both opposition and pro-government outlets report that she previously served in the Ministry of Human and Minority Rights, that multiple recordings have emerged in recent days, and that the material has generated intense public and media interest.

Across the spectrum, outlets agree that police have questioned or detained Pajković in connection with the videos and that investigators are examining whether any of the footage was filmed on government premises, amid official denials that earlier clips were shot in a state office. Media on both sides situate the case within Montenegro’s broader struggles with political accountability, the legacy of past administrations, and rule-of-law reforms, noting that the scandal touches on sensitive issues such as the conduct of public officials, the integrity of state institutions, and the credibility of ongoing anti-corruption and organized crime efforts.

Areas of disagreement

Framing of the scandal. Opposition-aligned sources tend to frame the emergence of the new explicit videos as symptomatic of a deeper culture of impunity and moral decay within the political elite, casting the material as evidence of how power has been abused behind closed doors. Pro-government outlets, by contrast, present the case more narrowly as a personal and sensational scandal involving a former official, emphasizing the lurid nature of the content but generally avoiding broad systemic conclusions about the current administration.

Institutional responsibility. Opposition coverage typically stresses the possibility that some recordings were made in government offices as proof that state premises have been misused for private or criminal purposes, and it presses the idea that high-level officials must have known or turned a blind eye. Pro-government media acknowledge the allegations and the public concern but highlight official denials that the videos were filmed in government facilities, framing the matter as something the authorities are responsibly clarifying rather than as evidence of institutional rot.

Links to organized crime and security failures. Opposition outlets emphasize the alleged presence of fugitive Nikola Drecun in one of the videos as a damning indictment of state security structures, questioning how a person wanted for a deadly bombing could be so closely connected to a former senior official without institutional complicity. Pro-government reporting notes Drecun’s status as a wanted suspect but treats this primarily as a reason for police questioning and further investigation, portraying the security services as actively addressing the issue rather than having failed in their duties.

Political accountability and legacy. Opposition narratives often situate Pajković within the broader network of former and current power holders, using the scandal to argue that promised reforms against corruption and clientelism have stalled or were never genuine. Pro-government coverage tends to isolate her as an individual associated with a prior governing structure, suggesting that her case shows why the current authorities are pushing for cleaner institutions and distancing today’s leadership from her actions.

In summary, opposition coverage tends to use the Pajković videos as a prism to question the integrity of state institutions and the sincerity of political reforms, while pro-government coverage tends to narrow the focus to an individual scandal, stress official denials and investigative actions, and minimize broader implications for the current administration.