CCE: The most complex cases must not be a training ground for inexperienced prosecutors

The Center for Civic Education (CCE) announced that it believes that the practice of assigning prosecutors with modest experience to work in the Special State Prosecutor's Office (SPO) should be seriously reconsidered, because working on cases under the jurisdiction of the SPO is a professional privilege, but also an enormous responsibility that requires a high level of knowledge and professional maturity.

"According to Article 24 of the Law on the Special State Prosecutor's Office, the Prosecutorial Council may, at the request of the Chief Special Prosecutor, assign a state prosecutor to the Special Prosecutor's Office for a fixed period of time, up to two years, to perform urgent tasks or an increased workload," reads a statement from the CCE, signed by the Human Rights Program Coordinator Ivan Vukčević.

As he adds, since the beginning of his mandate, the Chief Special Prosecutor has repeatedly used this opportunity, requesting the assignment of at least five prosecutors from the basic state prosecutor's offices.

"Of those five prosecutors, at least two (and perhaps more) had less than two years of experience in prosecutorial work before joining the SDT, that is, they did not even pass the first cycle of evaluation of their work as basic state prosecutors. This means that at the very beginning of their careers, prosecutors were given the opportunity to work on the most complex cases of high-level corruption and organized crime, although it is questionable whether they objectively have enough experience and professional security for such challenges. The Prosecutorial Council approved all such requests, thereby assuming part of the responsibility for establishing and maintaining this practice," they explain.

He emphasizes that the institution of referral to work must be the exception, not the rule.

"Its purpose is to temporarily assist the SDT with staff who, with their experience and knowledge, can respond to the challenges of complex criminal cases. This is also confirmed by European standards. The Consultative Council of European Prosecutors, in its Opinion No. 9 (2014), clearly states that 'promotion and mobility of prosecutors should be based on transparent and objective criteria, such as competence and experience'," he says.

Vukčević points out that "it is indicative that prosecutors from higher state prosecutors' offices in Podgorica and Bijelo Polje are not primarily selected for assignment to the SDT, who, by the nature of their work, should have more experience and competence to work on complex cases.

"This may raise the issue of (dis)trust in the staff of higher prosecutors' offices, but also of a possible concentration of influence and control over the handling of cases through the relationship with less experienced prosecutors. Additionally, this type of behavior burdens the basic state prosecutors' offices, which are already working on a large number of cases. Namely, vacancies cannot be announced for the positions of seconded prosecutors while they are in the SDT, so their work, in addition to their own, is taken over by colleagues who remain in the main prosecutor's offices," he said.

Vukčević says that ultimately, this practice also calls into question the system of professional advancement and motivation within the prosecutor's office.

"Prosecutors who are assigned to work in the SDT are entitled to a salary equal to that of a special prosecutor. If the Chief Special Prosecutor inappropriately often resorts to bringing prosecutors at the beginning of their careers to the SDT, then other prosecutors may be given the impression that professional development and financial progress depend more on the decision of the Chief Special Prosecutor than on the results of their work and the experience they have gained. The CCE does not dispute the institution of assignment to the SDT, because it is legitimate and necessary in certain situations. However, the practice of prosecutors with minimal experience taking over the most sensitive cases of organized crime and high-level corruption is not good in the long term for the quality of investigations, the credibility of the SDT, or public trust in the prosecutorial system," he said.

CCE believes that the most important criminal cases in the country should not be a place for accelerated experience acquisition.

"A state that wants to seriously fight organized crime and corruption must have the most experienced, not the most suitable or most accessible, staff on these cases, and the fact that we chronically lack results in this area emphasizes this point of view," the statement concludes.