Professors of the Faculty of Science, Jovan Mirković, Ph.D., and Nevenka Antović, Ph.D., yesterday in the Basic Court, characterized the introduction of video surveillance in the faculty's amphitheatres as arbitrariness, violence and violation of the dignity of professors, while the dean of that faculty, Predrag Stanišić, assessed that the cameras in that higher education establish the necessary
The professors and the dean agreed that the actions of the officials of the Personal Data Protection Agency in that case were unprofessional.
In January of this year, Mirković and Antović filed a lawsuit against the University of Montenegro, the Agency for the Protection of Personal Data and the state, demanding that the video surveillance be removed from the amphitheater and the corridor in front of the dean's office, which were installed in February last year and removed immediately. after filing a lawsuit.
They are asking for 1.000 euros each in the name of compensation for non-material damages due to the violation of personal rights.
Stanišić said that he believes that the safety of property and persons at that faculty is very much at risk, that the amphitheatres are in a very bad condition, that there is a great danger of theft of expensive computer equipment in other halls, and that is why he expanded the video surveillance.
In her testimony, Antović pointed out that almost a year had passed since the dean informed them that video surveillance had been introduced, until it was removed, and that even then, as she is now, she was very uncomfortable because of everything that was happening.
"Imagine that someone records what you do, watches and uses as they wish. We felt very humiliated", Antović stated, among other things.
She added that she tried to solve it at the faculty several times, she addressed the dean personally, stating that it was not appropriate for the faculty and that they approached the Agency after the dean did not react.
"The controllers carried out the supervision very strangely, so we filed a complaint, about which the dean informed the others at the session, stating that we are damaging the reputation of the faculty and his personally," said the professor.
She also said that even after several inspections by the Agency and the decision to remove the cameras, she tried to point out to the dean that the cameras were still not removed, which, according to her, was ridiculous to the dean.
Mirković pointed out that he is most surprised by the behavior of the Agency, which he believes should have reacted, especially if someone reports such a case.
"Three times we overturned the records of inspection supervision, I can't believe that the people they sent are so incompetent," Mirković said.
He added that the control of teaching quality could have been done by other methods and that the introduction of video surveillance was neither legal nor necessary.
Stanišić said that he believes that the safety of property and persons at that faculty is very much at risk, that the amphitheatres are in a very bad condition, that there is a great danger of theft of expensive computer equipment in other halls, and that is why he expanded the video surveillance, which was already in place for years, on four amphitheatres and a corridor in front of the dean's office.
He added that the Agency's decision on the removal of cameras, which was adopted in April last year, was delivered to him only in January of this year.
"We acted according to the three adopted minutes, as well as according to the final decision according to which the cameras were removed", stated Stanišić.
The professors stated that they were not aware that there were cameras at other faculties while they were teaching, but that, if so, they also expect the Agency to react
He clarified that the Agency's controllers, during their visit in September of last year, told him that a decision had been made to remove the cameras, but they did not deliver it to him until five months later.
"I did everything that was asked of me, although I do not agree with the Agency and I also think they are unprofessional," said the dean.
He added that the cameras were used for the security of persons and property of the faculty, as well as checking whether the professors regularly hold classes, and that the faculty suffers major consequences due to the removal of the cameras.
The trial continues on November XNUMX.
Stanišić: All faculties now have video surveillance
The dean commented that there is video surveillance at all the faculties where the prosecutors taught, but that he was not aware that they had complained or initiated proceedings against those faculties.
The professors stated that they were not aware that there were cameras at other faculties while they were teaching, but that, if so, they also expect the Agency to react. Stanišić added that the motives of the two professors are insincere and that it is a personal confrontation with him and defamation of his personality.
To the question of lawyer Veselin Radulović - on the basis of which he concluded that when he personally was not sued, but the University, and the prosecutors always addressed the competent state institutions, he replied that he was the head of the PMF, that he made the disputed decisions, and that his name is mentioned in the lawsuit, as well as in the media, in a negative context.
Bonus video:
