The Tender Commission has completed the months-long evaluation process for bids submitted for the concession of the Airports of Montenegro, and the Government’s final decision is expected soon. The Ministry of Transport published last week the updated ranking list of bidders, according to which the South Korean company Incheon International Airport Corporation (IIAC) is in first place.
As in the initial ranking list prepared by the Tender Commission and officially published on 17 July, IIAC received 96.18 points, while the Luxembourg-American company Corporación América Airports (CAAP) ranked second with 65.15 points.
Stable performance of the national airport operator
While the final outcome is pending, the Directorate for Civil Aviation within the Ministry of Transport stated that Airports of Montenegro, the state-owned company, continues to record stable growth and successful financial performance. They noted that these results show the system is functioning well even without a concession partner, but emphasized that the Government will consider broader public-interest criteria, investment needs, and long-term development of Montenegro’s aviation sector when making its decision.
According to the Directorate, Airports of Montenegro has consistently demonstrated positive performance, revenue growth, and financial stability, showing that the current management model is effective. These results serve as an important basis for assessing the future of the sector and confirm that the state has a reliable and responsible operator.
However, the Directorate stressed that the decision on whether a concession is necessary will not be based solely on the company’s present financial condition. The Government evaluates a wider set of criteria, including long-term infrastructure investment needs, the value of those investments relative to public funds, national development goals, project preparedness, technical documentation, property-legal issues, permits, and the broader public interest. This includes assessing how the selected model would improve Montenegro’s connectivity, tourism development, and balanced regional growth, as well as whether Airports of Montenegro can independently implement major capital investments.
Possible concession model
Despite the company’s current stable operations, the Government views the concession only as one possible model that could accelerate modernization and ensure additional investments, but only if it proves justified and does not undermine existing successful operations.
The Government does not comment on the details of the bids while the process is ongoing due to confidentiality. However, it emphasized that any future decision must ensure improved accessibility of Montenegro as a destination, including opportunities for low-cost airline development. The chosen management model, whether concession-based or otherwise, must not restrict market access, but instead provide sustainable traffic growth, greater competition, and better conditions for passengers.
IIAC’s offer reportedly does not include the development of low-cost airline bases. When asked whether this could reduce Montenegro’s accessibility for tourists and residents with lower travel budgets, the Directorate said that no elements of individual bids can be discussed while the selection process is ongoing.
The Directorate stated that low-cost bases are indeed an important aspect of market accessibility, but not the only criterion for evaluating the economic and social benefits of a concession. The Government evaluates the overall structure and scope of investments, impact on tourism, sustainability of the business model, and long-term national interest. The presence or absence of a single element such as low-cost bases cannot be the decisive factor; instead, all elements are weighed in context.
Potential risks for the national airline
According to unofficial information, if IIAC were granted the concession, there is a risk that the national airline could lose part of its market share to commercial partners. The Directorate responded that it is too early to speak about concrete market impacts since the final decision has not been made. However, it confirmed that the evaluation process gives special attention to maintaining market balance and protecting the interests of the national airline and other carriers operating in Montenegro. The chosen model must not restrict competition or market access, but should support the development of air traffic, an increase in destinations, and greater overall connectivity. All contractual elements will aim to ensure the sustainable operation of the national airline while securing fair competition.
Airport modernization remains a Government priority regardless of the concession outcome. Various investment models are being considered, including public-private partnerships, cooperation with international financial institutions, and the use of development funds or favourable credit lines. The goal is to expand and modernize airport infrastructure, improve Montenegro’s connectivity, and enhance passenger services while maintaining public interest and financial sustainability.
Corrections and appeals
The Ministry of Transport stated that the new ranking list was published after corrections to the tender evaluation report were made, as instructed by the Concessions Commission in its decision of 1 September. Under the Law on Concessions, bidders may submit an objection within 15 days of publication and may request access to documentation within eight days.
Earlier, the Concessions Commission partially upheld CAAP’s appeal against the initial ranking list, which delayed the Government’s decision. The ranking list was returned to the Tender Commission for clarification of inconsistencies in the explanation of scoring.
The Commission found that the original justification did not contain sufficiently clear and valid reasons for the scoring process, which is necessary to ensure transparency, equal treatment, and legality.
CAAP later filed a lawsuit at the Administrative Court on 19 September, requesting that certain actions of the Tender Commission be declared unlawful and that the first evaluation of technical offers be recognized as the only valid assessment. CAAP argues that it should therefore be ranked as the sole first-placed bidder.
The lawsuit includes multiple arguments, supported by an opinion from a leading Brussels law firm specializing in EU public procurement, which concluded that the re-evaluation process undermined the legality of the procedure. CAAP also requested that the court suspend all further actions related to the tender until a final ruling is issued.
The Concessions Commission previously rejected CAAP’s request to halt the tender, stating that the request lacked legal basis and that CAAP had not proven irreparable harm. The Commission added that halting the process would be contrary to public interest and legal certainty.
CAAP may still request a suspension of execution through the Administrative Court if legal conditions are met.
