At yesterday's electronic session, the Judicial Council could not determine the list of candidates who meet the requirements for the position of President of the Supreme Court, because they argued about whether the Valentina Pavlicic meets the conditions to join the race for the most important position in the judiciary.
For this reason, as stated in the notification of the Judicial Council, a regular session will be scheduled at a later date, at the request of "a certain number of members, because certain points require discussion".
In the notification, the Judicial Council did not disclose why exactly the electronic session was postponed, nor why it is necessary to discuss the opinions of the members at the regular session and make a decision of that collegial body.
According to "Vijesti" data, the dispute at the electronic session arose over the interpretation of Article 33 of the Law on the Judicial Council and Judges, that is, over whether the former representative of the state before the European Court of Human Rights has 20 years of cumulative or continuous experience as a judge, prosecutor, lawyer , notary public or in some other legal affairs...
The interpretation of whether Pavličić must have continuous experience in legal affairs is the reason why this question was left for the regular session of the Judicial Council.
The electronic session started at 10 a.m. and, according to information from Vijesti, the judge is at that time Predrag Tabas asked to postpone the discussion on the important points listed in the agenda, and that it would be best to declare the legal dispute in the interpretation of Article 33 at the regular session.
Valentina Pavličić, the long-time representative of Montenegro before the European Court of Human Rights, Acting President of the Supreme Court, applied for the public advertisement of the Judicial Council, which was published on July 10 this year. Vesna Vuckovic, judge of the Supreme Court Ana Vuković and President of the Administrative Court Miodrag Pešić.
In May of this year, even the eighth attempt to elect the president of the Supreme Court of Montenegro failed, and that position has been vacant since the end of 2020, when the former president Vesna Medenica left office.
At the beginning of September, it will be three full years that the court system has been managed by judge Vesna Vučković in an acting capacity.
In addition to the issue of determining the list of candidates who meet the requirements prescribed by law for the election of the President of the Supreme Court of Montenegro, the Judicial Council had several other important questions for the electronic session.
On the agenda of the President of the Judicial Council Radoja Korac an important point was also mentioned - the request of the judge of the Basic Court in Kotor Maria Bilafer for exercising rights from work and on the basis of work.
The Special State Prosecutor's Office recently suspended the investigation against Judge Bilafer, which was launched in 2021 due to suspicions that she had allegedly abused her official position. Because of that investigation, Bilafer was removed from the position of judge.
Got the Government because of the interruption of the mandate
In June of this year, the Administrative Court accepted the complaint of the former representative of Montenegro before the European Court of Human Rights, Valentina Pavličić, and annulled the Government's decision terminating her mandate.
Pavličić's mandate was interrupted because the new Regulation on the representative of the state before the court in Strasbourg entered into force.
She disputed the legality of that decision due to the violation of administrative procedure and incorrect application of substantive law, stating that the limitation on the number of mandates in itself is not illegal, but in the specific case it was arbitrarily implemented and did not exist during the period of appointment of the plaintiff.
Bonus video:
