By filling key positions in the judiciary, Montenegro is sending an important message to the European Union (EU), but for progress in the negotiations on membership in that community, this is not enough, concrete results in the chapters on the rule of law are necessary.
This was said by the interlocutors of "Vijesti", analyzing how the election of three members of the Judicial Council the day before yesterday will affect Montenegro's negotiations with the EU.
The election of members of the Council, judges of the Constitutional Court, the Supreme State Prosecutor (VDT) and the President of the Supreme Court are among the key requirements of the EU, and the state has fulfilled most of them.
The decision of the parliament on the members of the Judicial Council was welcomed by the highest officials of Montenegro and the EU, emphasizing that this is a significant step towards closing the key negotiation chapters - 23 and 24 (judiciary and fundamental rights, justice, freedom and security).
Lawyer and executive director of Action for Human Rights (HRA), Tea Gorjanc Prelevic, told "Vijesti" that the appointments alone, which include the election of the VDT in full term and the president of the Supreme Court, are not enough for Montenegro to progress in the negotiations, as would receive the final benchmarks for chapter 23.
"It needs to fulfill other temporary benchmarks, such as the implementation of the recommendations of the Venice Commission and GRECO (Council of Europe Group of States for the fight against corruption), proactive prosecution of war crimes, improvement of judicial reform by strengthening accountability, strengthening the independence and activities of the Agency for the Prevention of of corruption (ASK), resolving cases of attacks on journalists...", she pointed out.
Gorjanc Prelević states that the election of three members of the Judicial Council is an important indicator that the current convocation of the Assembly can fulfill its obligations and ensure the continuity of the work of state bodies. He adds, however, that he believes that there should have been a dialogue between the government and the opposition about the candidates, in the general interest of the quality work of the Council.
"But the dialogue should have taken place in the competent committee - and publicly, and not behind the scenes regarding the exchange of services and interests that have nothing to do with the Judicial Council, as was the case before. The new members must bear in mind the mistakes of their predecessors, and I expect them to act with a much more pronounced sense of responsibility towards the public office and the public, transparently, impartially and in accordance with the law", the interviewee underlines.
The Assembly elected Fikret Kurgaš, Miodrag Iličković and Dražen Medojević to the Judicial Council, thus ending the mandate of the three former members of that judicial body, in which they unconstitutionally served almost five and a half years, and a total of over nine.
While the parliamentary majority and the Government claim that the election of three lawyers is an important step for the reform and strengthening of the judiciary, as well as EU integration, part of the opposition blames them for not having a dialogue about the candidates, even though they supported some.
Acting President of the Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS), Danijel Živković, said that "already agreed upon solutions" were delivered to the opposition, and that this could come back to power like a boomerang.
The members of the Judicial Council were elected a month after the composition of the Constitutional Court was completed, so now all that remains is the election of the VDT and the President of the Supreme Court.
The day before yesterday, VDT did not need the support (votes of 54 MPs) in the parliament, so a new vote will have to wait at least a month. When it comes to the head of the Supreme Court, the Judicial Council should decide on him at the beginning of next week.
DON'T MISS IT
Ana Nenezić from the Institute for Socio-Political Research Analitiko, assesses that the election of members of the Judicial Council is an important signal to the EU and a necessary precondition for restarting the integration process.
She told "Vijesta" that the fact that the newly elected members received more votes than they needed to take up their positions, shows that there is a high degree of agreement among the deputies about the quality of those members. 77 deputies voted for Kurgaš, 63 supported Iličković, and 56 supported Medojević.
"This process, together with the election of the VDT, is key to unblocking and revitalizing the judicial system, which has been in stagnation for a long time. Without these steps, it is difficult to expect progress in the areas of justice and the rule of law, which are key to the EU integration process," Nenezić pointed out.
However, the interlocutor notes that, in addition, there are "a number of remaining and no less important measures" that Montenegro should implement within the framework of Chapter 23. These measures, she explains, include a wide range of activities - from strengthening the capacity of judicial authorities to improving mechanisms for the fight against organized crime. crime and corruption.
"Only when we fulfill all the stated prerequisites, Montenegro can get the final benchmarks for this chapter and unblock the process," said Nenezić.
In the key chapters, 23 and 24, which must be closed first so that the others can be closed, Montenegro needs to fulfill 83 transitional benchmarks, which the EU sent it a decade ago. As citizen activist Dina Bajramspahić recently explained, a third of those standards have not been met or have been partially met.
The measures, as she stated, were related to the harmonization of laws with European and international standards, the completion of the process of rationalization of the judicial network, the adoption of a national strategy for the fight against corruption...
If Montenegro fulfills the temporary benchmarks, the EU will make a recommendation to obtain the final benchmarks, which would lead the country to close the chapter. Brussels expects Montenegro to show in the next six months that it is ready to close the chapter.
In the recently published report of the European Commission, it was assessed that Montenegro has not made progress in reforming the judiciary, and that corruption, including high level, is still a concern and prevails in many areas, including state structures.
Although the results of the Special State Prosecutor's Office were praised, the document said that Montenegro should demonstrate a rigorous and unambiguous judicial response to crime.
Montenegro has been negotiating with the EU since June 2012, and since then it has opened all negotiation chapters, a total of 33, and temporarily closed only three.
Those whose mandate was extended committed at least one criminal offense
Speaking about the unconstitutional mandate of some of the previous members of the Judicial Council, Gorjanc Prelević says that he does not consider it particularly worrying to extend the mandate in a situation where there are no adequate candidates, but that it is clear that this was not the case.
He reminds that in five years, as many as 51 candidates were heard, in addition to others, a judge of the European Court for Human Rights (Nebojša Vučinić), and that three "adequate persons" could be selected from among them. However, according to her, it was about something else.
"On the lack of responsibility of deputies for the general interest of the work of the Judicial Council and the judiciary - the election of those members, as well as judges of the Constitutional Court, was perceived as an opportunity for political blackmail and trade, to satisfy the party's interest instead of the general interest. This degree of irresponsibility is of course not a recommendation for EU membership, which implies that the state can regularly ensure the functioning of its bodies, by choosing adequate experts for EU bodies, let alone its own," emphasizes Gorajnc Prelevic.
The interlocutor assesses that the matter would perhaps not be so terrible if the members of the Judicial Council, who, due to parliamentary obstruction, were enabled to perform their functions in that body for over nine years, had not "acted in a very questionable way in that position" and, in HRA's opinion, had committed at least one criminal offense - falsification of grades at the interview of candidates for judges, when they graded nine people to whom they did not ask any questions.
"They elected Vesna Medenica for an unconstitutional third term, seven presidents of basic courts were elected for third, fifth, sixth and eighth terms, despite the legal limit of two terms. The EC has criticized them for unreasoned decisions every year since 2015. It is bad that the critical mass of male and female deputies in the earlier convocations of the Assembly were not interested enough in all of this to decide to replace those people", states Gorjanc Prelevic.
The three members of the Judicial Council from among distinguished lawyers in the unconstitutional mandate were Vesna Simović Zvicer, Dobrica Šljivančanin and Loro Markić.
Bonus video:
