Basic Court: She reported the suspect's husband for an incident from more than 15 months ago, says that he has not threatened her since then

The basic court in Podgorica reacted to the announcement of the non-governmental organization Sistem, which expressed its protest over the decision of the judge of that court not to accept that a restraining order be imposed on a suspect for violence against his wife.

The response signed by the judge and spokesperson Ivana Becić is transmitted in its entirety:

"The judge for the investigation of the Basic Court in Podgorica rejected the proposal to determine a measure of supervision, prohibiting access or meeting with the victim, who reported him for an event from more than a year and three months ago, during which time he did not threaten her, which she herself confirmed .

As a reminder, the investigating judge released this suspect a month ago to defend himself, because there were no legal reasons for his detention. From the moment of his release to the moment of submission of the state prosecutor's proposal for the imposition of the supervision measure, there were no new circumstances that could be brought under the legal grounds for imposing the requested measure, nor did the state prosecutor state or explain any circumstance that represents a well-founded reason for the imposition surveillance measures, while reasonable suspicion of a committed criminal offense for which the suspect is charged, is the basis for conducting criminal proceedings and imposing a criminal sanction if it is established that he is guilty in the procedure established by law.

Therefore, in addition to the well-founded suspicion that a criminal offense has been committed, the law also requires specific circumstances that indicate the danger, among other things, of repeating the crime, or the danger that he will commit the criminal offense he threatens, in order to order custody or a surveillance measure, so if the suspect is not he was previously convicted, nor did he threaten her after the critical event for which he was reported by his wife more than 15 months later, which she herself confirmed, the investigating judge made a decision rejecting such a proposal. There are no facts in the case file that would indicate that this is a mentally unstable person, on the contrary, it is an employee of the National Security Agency who, by the nature of things, had to undergo numerous security assessments that also related to the psychological aspect of his personality. In order to eliminate the risk, his apartment was also searched, and no weapons were found on him.

Finally, the suspect and the injured party have not lived together since June 11, 6. Also, the investigating judge finds that the fact that the injured party left the shelter for victims of violence after more than a month after submitting the report, cannot constitute a circumstance that constitutes the basis for imposing the proposed supervision measure, because she did not do so under any direct or indirect pressure or influence. suspect, and therefore this fact cannot have repercussions for the suspect's personal rights and freedoms.

It is very important to emphasize that the court makes its decisions in accordance with the law and the factual situation in the case files, and in no case does it "allow" or support any form of violence, especially not violence against women.

We emphasize that the court's decision on rejecting the proposal to order detention or the imposition of surveillance measures does not imply the acquittal of persons suspected of violence against women, but any violence will be adequately punished by the court in a procedure prescribed by law, if it is proven that it really was and done. Therefore, it cannot and must not be expected from the court that in every case in which a person is charged with violence against women, he will be immediately deprived of his liberty, or that he will be imposed a measure of supervision, although in any case he will be responsible for the crime committed .

For the above reasons, we appreciate the inadmissible address of the NGO Sistem, even the second time, to the public with sensationalist headlines and texts on the same subject, which do not represent constructive criticism of the work of the court, but non-objective information to the public and a kind of attempt to influence the independent, legal and objective work of the court. That it is about this way of reporting speaks in favor of the fact that the reason for the actions of the investigating judge of the Basic Court in Podgorica, Rado Ćetković, who is assigned as an investigating judge according to the court's annual work schedule and who is on call for two weeks in month, while during the whole month he acts during regular working hours, so his actions in this as well as in all other cases that he assigns and conscientiously and promptly processes and decides are completely unquestionable. For the stated reasons, we direct the public to visit the website of the Basic Court in Podgorica and download the decision of the judge for the investigation, which was attacked by the disputed text," said the Basic Court in Podgorica.