Balijagic's 40-Year Sentence Upheld in Montenegro

Montenegro’s Supreme Court has rejected as unfounded the appeals filed by Alija Balijagic and his defense lawyer, leaving in place a 40-year prison sentence for the murders of Jovan and Milenka Madzgalj, a brother and sister from the village of Sokolac near Bijelo Polje. The case in neighboring Montenegro has now reached its court conclusion less than two years after the crime, and a panel of the Supreme Court announced the decision in a statement.

The sentence was first handed down by the Higher Court in Bijelo Polje in December 2025. The Court of Appeals of Montenegro upheld it in May 2026, and the Supreme Court has now ruled on appeals against that second-instance verdict. It is a single sentence covering aggravated murder combined with the unlawful possession and carrying of weapons and explosives.

What did the court establish about the night of the killings?

According to the facts established at trial, Balijagic came to the victims’ house in Sokolac on the evening of October 25, 2024, and falsely introduced himself as a hunter. The family welcomed him, he left, and he returned several hours later.

He then climbed onto a concrete block to reach window height, the court found. He fired once at Jovan Madzgalj and then twice at Milenka Madzgalj, who was trying to call the police. The weapon was a hunting rifle that Balijagic had held and carried without authorization.

Why did the court reject the heat-of-the-moment defense?

The Supreme Court accepted the lower courts’ conclusion that the murder was carried out treacherously: the defendant knowingly created and exploited circumstances in which the victims did not expect an attack and could not defend themselves. The defense had argued that it was a murder committed in a fit of passion, but the court found that the defendant’s conduct as a whole, including his first visit and his return during the night, pointed to premeditated and deceitful behavior.

Appeal arguments claiming the facts had been wrongly established were also dismissed, among them the defense’s objections to the DNA expert findings. The court found that the lower courts had established all relevant facts correctly and completely.

Was Balijagic of sound mind?

The second set of appeals challenged the defendant’s mental capacity. The Supreme Court’s statement says on this point:

“Considering the appeal arguments that challenged the defendant’s mental capacity, the Supreme Court found that the lower courts had correctly accepted the findings of the psychiatric and psychological expert evaluations. The experts found that Balijagic has an antisocial personality disorder, but not a mental illness or arrested mental development. According to their conclusion, the established personality disorder did not affect the defendant’s ability to understand the significance of his actions and to control his conduct, which is why the court found that he was of sound mind at the time the offenses were committed.”

The arguments on mental capacity were therefore rejected, and the finding that the defendant was of sound mind when he committed the crimes stands.

How did the court justify the length of the sentence?

In deciding on the sentence, the Supreme Court concluded that all mitigating and aggravating circumstances had been properly weighed. According to the statement, the 40-year term of long-term imprisonment is justified and proportionate to the gravity of the offenses and the defendant’s degree of guilt, and it is also necessary to achieve the purpose of punishment.