Two weeks remain until the end of the deadline given by the European Commission to the Judicial Council to complete one of the key temporary benchmarks - the election of the President of the Supreme Court.
In order to meet that criterion, which is high on the list for obtaining IBAR in June this year, it will be necessary for one of the candidates to apply for the advertisement, which expires in a few days, but also for the good will of the judges of the Supreme Court to at the General Session submit a proposal to the Judicial Council for the most important position in the judiciary.
The President of the Judicial Council, Radoje Korać, emphasized that the eighth advertisement for the selection of a leading figure has been announced, but that he cannot and does not want to influence the proposal to be submitted by the Supreme Court.
"The Judicial Council expressed its expectation that the Supreme Court will finally determine the proposal for the Judicial Council that the Supreme Court get a president. We have a date from the EC when we should elect the president of the Supreme Court, we are not really sure that even now at the General Session of the Supreme Court, that will be happens. We do our job and not a single ad has been left without being published immediately. We will by no means suggest to the court how it votes. It would be desirable for them to vote however they want," said Korac at the presentation of the report on the work of the Judicial Council for 2023. year.
His presentation was followed up by SS member Miodrag Iličković, who, when asked by "Vijesti" whether the appeal of the Judicial Council to the Supreme Court judges might have been pressured during the secret election process, explained that the current situation has been going on for a long time and that it is "incomprehensible to him that 17 judges of the Supreme Court cannot nominate one colleague out of eight advertisements".
"We suffer complaints from the EU, the Venice Commission, and now the only imperative for everyone is to elect the president of the Supreme Court. From session to session, it happens that the judges will not vote for or against. The least that comes to mind is that it could be pressure from the Judicial Council "It is imperative for all of us to elect the president of the Supreme Court, we do not suggest any procedure other than the existing one. We are also eagerly waiting for legal changes to finally obtain a situation that has not existed so far," said Iličković.
He did not have information on whether anyone applied for the advertisement for the election of a candidate for the Supreme Court president, which was published at the beginning of April.
"If the Assembly recently, where 10 parties with different interests sit, was able to elect three members of the Judicial Council with a 2/3 majority, I really do not understand why 17 judges could not propose one candidate," said Iličković.
SS member Sanja Konatar also reiterated that April 24 is the deadline given by the EC to elect the president of the Supreme Court.
The key position has been vacant since the end of 2020, when Vesna Medenica retired from office, and in an acting capacity since September 2021, the judiciary is headed by judge Vesna Vučković.
The last ad failed on March 15, when candidates Ana Vuković and Ranko Vukić did not receive the two-thirds support of their colleagues in the Supreme Court.
This time, Judge Vuković needed only two votes to reach the Judicial Council, and that would probably not have happened if there were not as many as five invalid ballots in the ballot box, after a secret process.
In the introductory part, Korać enumerated the key statistical data, so last year the termination of the judicial function was established for 36 judges, 21 at personal request, 14 due to the acquisition of conditions for old-age pension and one due to death.
"An evaluation procedure was carried out for 63 judges, of which 52 were evaluated in the regular procedure, seven for the purpose of advancement and three when running for president of the courts. Of that number, 33 judges were evaluated as excellent, while 30 judges were evaluated as good," he said. is Korac.
He pointed out that three disciplinary procedures were conducted during 2023, and that two case proposals were rejected as unfounded, and one that was initiated at the end of last year was completed at the beginning of this year.
This is the case that was conducted against the judge of the Higher Court in Podgorica, Suzana Mugoša.
Korać stated that one disciplinary procedure from 2021 is still ongoing.
"In 2023, nine initiatives were submitted for violation of the Code of Ethics, and 91 complaints about the work of courts, councils and judges were submitted to the SS Complaints Commission. Of that number, 28 complaints remained unresolved," Korac counted.
He also pointed to intensive cooperation with European partners, but also a serious shortage of judges.
"At the moment, the Montenegrin courts should have 304 judges and 25 presidents. Today in Montenegro, there are 247 judges and 22 court presidents. We are missing 57 judges and three court presidents. We do not have a president of the Supreme Court, the High Court for Misdemeanors and the Basic Court in Žabljak, and the procedures based on the public announcement are ongoing. In the last three years, 106 judges have left the court system," said Korać.
Bonus video:
