In order for the judges of the Supreme Court at the General Session to be able to express their opinion on the candidates for the president of that court, they must first amend the Rules of Procedure, and, according to "Vijesti" information, this has not yet been done due to disputes over the voting method.
Yesterday, the Judicial Council determined the list of candidates for the president of the Supreme Court, on which all were registered - former representative of Montenegro before the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg Valentina Pavličić, judge of the Supreme Court Ana Vuković, acting president of that court Vesna Vučković and president of the Administrative Court Miodrag Pešić.
DON'T MISS IT
The Judicial Council announced that it will submit the list of candidates to the General Session of the Supreme Court in order to conduct interviews with the registered candidates and determine the proposal for the election of the president of that court, which will again be submitted to the Judicial Council for decision, in accordance with the Constitution.
According to the new Law on the Judicial Council and judges, the Judicial Council pronounces on all candidates who "received more than half of the votes of the total number of judges of the Supreme Court" at the General Session. If none of the registered candidates receives the necessary majority in the first round, the vote will be repeated between the candidates who received more than a quarter of the votes.
According to an earlier provision of the Law, candidates in the first round needed the support of two-thirds of the total number of judges of the Supreme Court.
The source of "Vijesti" says that the judges of the Supreme Court cannot now agree on the majority required when declaring the candidates for president. The Supreme Court should have 19 judges, but two seats are vacant, so there are 17.
"A number of judges believe that the majority for voting is calculated in relation to the existing number of judges (17), and some that it should be viewed in relation to the established number of judges, i.e. 19. This means that at least ten votes would be needed to elect the president" , the source explained, citing the example of the Constitutional Court, which was blocked, because the majority was calculated in relation to the legally established number of judges (seven), and not to the existing one.
The Supreme Court did not want to comment on those allegations, but they confirmed to "Vijesta" that the Rules of Procedure have not yet been adopted and that they need to comply with the new voting method, in accordance with the Law on the Judicial Council and Judges.
"The Commission for drafting the Rules of Procedure was formed earlier, some changes have already been made, but they need to be refined in accordance with the new legal solutions", they stated.
As they added, he should submit the Draft to the judges and schedule a General Session where it would be adopted.
The source of "Vijesti" says that they have been working on changes to the Rules of Procedure since April.
The Supreme Court said that the General Session, where the candidates for the president of the court will be voted on, will be scheduled "after the conditions have been met".
Amendments to the Law on Judges and the Judicial Council were adopted in June, as part of the package of laws required for Montenegro to receive from the EU the Report on the Assessment of the Fulfillment of the Temporary Benchmarks for Chapters 23 and 24 (IBAR). Among other things, the circle of potential candidates for the president of the Supreme Court was expanded to them, so now candidates who are not judges and prosecutors could also apply for that position.
Yesterday's session of the Judicial Council was attended by Minister of Justice Bojan Božović, in order, as "Vijesti" previously reported, to reconcile positions and clarify ambiguities regarding the determination of the list of candidates for the president of the Supreme Court, a position that has been vacant since the end of 2020.
Last week, the Judicial Council could not determine the list of candidates for the president of the Supreme Court at the electronic session because they argued about whether the candidate Valentina Pavličić met the conditions of the competition. The dispute arose over the interpretation of Article 33 of the Law on the Judicial Council and Judges, i.e. over whether Pavličić has 20 years of cumulative or continuous experience as a judge, prosecutor, lawyer, notary or in some other legal positions...
The Ministry of Justice said that the changes to the law made it possible for a person who is not a judge or a state prosecutor to be elected to that position, and who has twenty years of work experience in various legal jobs, "which is counted cumulatively".
Bonus video:
