We must additionally tighten the penal policy regarding the possession and carrying of weapons, and analyze all the shortcomings of the system regarding the provision of adequate psychological and psychiatric assistance in competent institutions.
This was said by the Minister of Justice Bojan Božović, answering the question of what should be done after the massacre in Cetinje the night before last, the second in the last two and a half years, in which 12 citizens died and four were wounded.
In an interview with "Vijesta" conducted by e-mail, he talked about the events in the Constitutional Court, vetting in the judiciary, changes in the law on confiscation of illegally acquired property...
In Cetinje, on Wednesday evening, 12 people were killed in a mass crime, including two children, while doctors are fighting for the lives of four citizens. This is the second such crime in the past two and a half years in the capital - in the first, in August 2022, Vuk Borilović killed 10 fellow citizens and wounded six. Could something have been done legally since that tragedy to prevent it from happening again, such as, for example, to introduce stricter controls and more rigorous criteria for issuing permits to keep weapons? Why was this not done? What do you think should be done immediately after this tragedy?
Aware of numerous shortcomings, but above all the insufficiently precise provisions and mild sanctions that were prescribed for the criminal offense of illegal possession of weapons, in December 2023 we adopted amendments to the Criminal Code (CPC). Article 403 of the CC was amended in such a way that the actions of keeping and carrying firearms, their parts, ammunition and explosive substances are clearly separated. According to the new Criminal Code, the punishment for possession of weapons is now threatened from three months to three years, unlike the previous solution, in which the basic form was prescribed a prison sentence of only three months.
With the new Criminal Code, we also provided that the illegal carrying of a weapon carries a prison sentence of one to five years, and more serious forms of this criminal offense are also prescribed.
Although the roots of such tragedies, as well as the means to prevent them, cannot be found in criminal law models because they are deep psycho-social cases, I will advocate for the strictest possible sanctions regarding the illegal carrying of weapons and other explosive materials, which will certainly be discussed and at today's session of the National Security Council.
Without intending to go into the issues of competence of colleagues from other departments, I believe that we must additionally tighten the criminal policy regarding the possession and carrying of weapons, and certainly also analyze all the shortcomings of the system regarding the provision of adequate psychological and psychiatric help in the competent institutions. I do not want to mention here that it is high time to investigate more deeply whether the persons who were imposed measures for the execution of security measures are required to receive psychiatric treatment and custody in a health institution - adequately taken care of and what effect these measures later had in practice. All of these are complex issues that we obviously haven't solved either as a society or as a single system.
The opposition claims that a "constitutional coup" took place at the session of the Constitutional Committee on December 17, because that parliamentary working body, without notifying the Constitutional Court, concluded that the former judge of that court, Dragana Đuranović, had fulfilled the conditions for retirement. They ask for the annulment of the board's decision, while you claim that it is legally impossible. For what?
The material and legal situation is completely clear. The judge Đuranović fulfilled the conditions for termination of office according to the Law on Pension and Disability Insurance (PIO), and the Assembly acted in the specific case in the only correct way. Everything else is pure politicking. Of course, the dissatisfied party, due to possible procedural disturbances, always has the right to appeal to the court and try to exercise their rights, and all this is completely normal and natural. But calling the retirement of one judge who met the conditions for retirement a "constitutional coup" and therefore blocking the work of the Assembly is really difficult to understand. As we have seen, today the Constitutional Court functions smoothly, we have five judges (four is enough for a quorum) and there is no "constitutional crisis". The Assembly has issued a call for the election of new judges, and I believe that we will soon have all seven.
What needs to be done in order to finally resolve the legal dilemma of whether judges of the Constitutional Court retire under the PIO Act or the Labor Act, and will you have any initiative in this regard?
I never even had a dilemma because the conditions are exclusively prescribed by the Law on PIO, and due to the possibly incorrect application of the regulations in a previous case, a right that we would consider to have greater legal force than the legal framework cannot be based. However, if there are really some significant doubts, additional interventions on the Law on PIO or the Law on the Constitutional Court are possible, but this is certainly not an issue that concerns only the department that I manage.
Why did the ruling parties, including your Movement Europe Now (PES), not solve this problem, but instead tried to "save" some former judges of the Constitutional Court with legal and political games?
In the answer to the previous question, I gave an answer, but I will remind you that for me there is absolutely no dilemma here and that everything is already prescribed by the PIO Act. After all, as far as I am convinced of this, I also want to point out that from a legal point of view, it is clear that not only Ms. Đuranović's mandate should have been terminated, but also other judges who are in a similar position, but the Constitutional Committee, precisely because of the uneven previous practice, also acted politically very responsible and did not want to take upon himself the obligation to leave the Constitutional Court without a quorum to work. But if we are going to look at the whole situation exclusively legally, I have no doubt that the Constitutional Committee could have acted differently and terminated the functions of everyone and would not have made a mistake.
This fall, you announced that at the beginning of 2025 you plan to introduce vetting in a "certain form", i.e. the procedure for checking the assets of judges and prosecutors, their possible ties to crime, and their professional competences. How do you intend to do it, according to whom and within what time frame, and do you, after the arrest of former judges, prosecutors and officials of the public and secret police, agree with the assessments of some NGOs - that vetting "has no alternative"?
It would be illusory to say that as of August 30, 2020, we got rid of everything that we can still read through correspondence in Sky applications, and it refers to the connection of certain criminal structures with parts of the judiciary. Nevertheless, we believe that the situation is incomparably better, that the work of the Special State Prosecutor's Office (SDT), as well as the changes in the law regarding the organization of the judiciary, have produced results, which can be seen in the reports of the European Commission. In addition, we must continue in this direction, intensify work on the preparation of "anti-corruption laws" and create all the preconditions for their smooth application. This is supported by changes in the management of the Agency for the Prevention of Corruption (ASK), as well as three conferences that we organized together with the non-governmental sector and international partners, where we heard numerous recommendations that we will incorporate into the existing legislation.
The new law on whistleblowers will also be one of the important tools in the fight against corruption, which we will adopt by the end of 2025. However, all this must be accompanied by some form of checking the ethical and disciplinary responsibility and lifestyles of all those connected to the judiciary and state prosecution. , including representatives of the Ministry of Justice. Whether we will call that model vetting or something else - we will see, but we certainly expect it during 2025. Of course, this will be preceded by a dialogue, as well as relevant changes to the legislative framework.
What, specifically, do you plan to do to improve the capacities and working conditions of the Special Department of the High Court in Podgorica, which has only six judges, who have only two courtrooms at their disposal, and almost 170 cases of organized crime?
As you know, the Judicial Council has already predicted that in addition to the existing six, there will be six more judges. President of the Supreme Court of Montenegro, Valentina Pavlicic, is already undertaking certain activities, and as a person who has spent a significant part of her career in this department, she is one of the most invited to help us all with her advice. The government will continue to work to improve the infrastructural and material conditions for work, and we hope that the Judicial Council will fill the missing positions as soon as possible.
What about the idea of the former Minister of Justice Mr. Andrej Milović on the formation of a special court, which would deal with cases in the field of organized crime, high corruption and war crimes, that is, proceedings under the jurisdiction of the SDT? Has that idea been abandoned, if so - why, and if not - at what stage is it and when can we expect the establishment of that court?
We must first restore trust in the judiciary and encourage people to be part of it, and then create the basis for the creation of such an important institution. Unfortunately, we are not in a position to elect even the six missing judges for the High Court, and in the short term we have sufficient capacities to build such an important court as the special one. We are all of the opinion that this process should be implemented, but we are going step by step, because the special court also monitors the construction and establishment of other institutions, such as the colloquially mentioned palace of justice. However, while we are working on that, we are also working on strengthening the High Court so that the proceedings we have started do not take even longer.
How do you view the proposed and then withdrawn PES proposal to amend the Code of Criminal Procedure (CPC), which provided for the extension of detention from the indictment to the first-instance verdict from three to five years? Do you think that such a solution would help society, given that part of the state leadership accuses judges of being guilty of the fact that accused murderers walk freely and commit new crimes after being released from custody, or do you think that such an idea is an attack on rights guaranteed by the Constitution? What is the best solution for speeding up criminal proceedings, i.e. the efficiency of trials, will you initiate something in this regard, and if so - what and when?
PES MPs, relying on suggestions from the Supreme State Prosecutor's Office (VDT) and SDT, as well as the conclusions of the National Security Council, appreciated that the most serious criminal offenses require more than three years to conduct the proceedings. And this practice is not at all unknown in the world, because in the EU alone we have at least eight countries that have these and similar norms. After all, I also ask the following question: if, for example, in the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia there was no such limitation for proceedings based on war crimes and the proceedings lasted for more than a decade, how can we realistically expect that our courts for similar crimes complete the proceedings in less than three years?
Again, on the other hand, I also understand the fear of too long proceedings, the fear that the proceedings of over three years may be more of a "punishment" and not just what it should be - a measure to ensure the presence of the accused in the proceedings. For the most part, that proposal was withdrawn today, I hope that because of this no one will bear the consequences - neither the accused, nor the proceedings, nor anyone who has nothing to do with the aforementioned.
In addition, and not in a direct connection, the Ministry of Justice, through amendments to the CPC, provided for 78 provisions that, among other things, will enable faster and more efficient criminal proceedings, as well as a greater degree of procedural discipline in the courts. This proposal has been submitted to the European Commission and final consultations are currently underway regarding the solution that will be applicable in Montenegro. We hope that the CPC in a new and more modern form will be in force in the first quarter of 2025.
Bearing in mind that in the case of the former high-ranking official of Montenegro and the Democratic Party of Socialists Svetozar Marović, the absolute statute of limitations is approaching for the execution of the prison sentence he was sentenced to in 2016 for the criminal offense of abuse of official position through organized incitement, what will you do to bring him to justice? Have you raised the issue of his extradition with the competent state authorities in Serbia, and if so - what response did you receive and what will be your next steps?
The Ministry of Justice requested extradition from the Republic of Serbia in an extradition request dated April 2, 4. Marović. Since no response was received from the competent authorities of the Republic of Serbia regarding the above-mentioned request for extradition, the Ministry of Justice sent an emergency on 10 February 2 and 2020 June 25, requesting information on the stage of the proceedings before the competent authorities of the Republic of Serbia. After that, the request for extradition was repeated on December 6, 2020, while two emergency requests were sent in 28, but to date no official response has been received from the competent authorities of the Republic of Serbia.
We remind you that there is an international warrant issued for Marović by the NCB Interpol Podgorica, which in itself implies the obligation to locate and deprive him of liberty in order to carry out the extradition procedure.
We recently spoke with representatives of the Government of the Republic of Serbia and will continue our discussions on this topic.
Has the Ministry of Justice received any information from the US about the affairs of Miodrag Daka Davidović and the late Branislav Bran Mićunović, who were sanctioned by that country in November 2023 for "connections with crime and malicious influence of Russia in the region"? If not - why, if yes - what kind, and what will you do about it?
The Ministry of Justice is aware of the decision of the US Department of Finance, Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) dated October 16, 2023, which placed the mentioned persons under the sanctions regime of the US Government within the Executive Order of the President of the USA no. 14033, which refer to the Western Balkans. However, the Ministry of Justice is not responsible for sanctions, i.e. restrictive measures imposed by states or international organizations, nor their implementation in an administrative or criminal-legal sense.
Will the department headed by you work on changes to the Law on Confiscation of Property Gains from Criminal Activity, if so - what do you intend to achieve with the changes, and what do you think about the proposal of the chief special prosecutor, Mr. Vladimir Novović on the introduction of the so-called of the French model, according to which a special institution should be formed that would take care of confiscated property?
The working group will start working in January, and the representatives of SDT, VDT will certainly play a very important role in that work, and of course we will have consultations with colleagues from the civil sector who have decades of experience in monitoring this issue. Each model, including French and Italian, has some specifics, and therefore advantages and disadvantages. Today it is ungrateful to determine which one is the most adequate for us, but we agree that the existing one did not give the results we wanted.
What is the Ministry of Justice undertaking to improve the conditions for the work of the SDT, and when will all the necessary databases of other institutions be available to that institution?
The Special State Prosecutor's Office is an institution that has earned the trust of the professional and lay public in Montenegro and abroad, and it is the duty of the executive power to provide them with the best possible working conditions. Part of those challenges have already been solved through an increase in the number of special prosecutors, a slightly better financial position, but also by adopting certain suggestions from the SDT regarding the appearance of positive legal norms. That is still not enough, we must also provide better spatial capacities, continue to increase staff... There is a readiness for this, and the Supreme State Prosecutor's Office and SDT will definitely have our full support.
Access to databases is not within the competence of the Ministry of Justice, because most often the problem lies in the fact that even these institutions do not have adequate data or possibly in some other factor. The Ministry of Justice has prepared the Strategy for Digitization of the Judiciary, which will be adopted at the beginning of 2025, and which will provide additional guidelines to competent institutions in this regard. As far as infrastructure issues are concerned, the SDT relocation process is taking an unacceptably long time, and all of us in the executive branch must make additional efforts to finally finalize this issue.
When do you expect Alija Balijagić, the suspect for the double murder in the village near Bijeli Polje, to be extradited to Montenegro? Does he have to wait until he serves his sentence for the criminal offenses he is charged with in Serbia, and only then be extradited?
The Ministry of Justice submitted a request for extradition Alija Balijagić November 22, 2024 Extradition procedures in practice require a certain amount of time until the final decision of the competent authorities is made, which also depends on various aspects of each specific case. At this moment, we would not prejudge what the decision of the Republic of Serbia will be, but we believe that the competent authorities of that country will take into account the seriousness of the crimes that the defendant Balijagić is charged with, that is, the crime he committed in Montenegro. There are good signals going in that direction, but I couldn't tell you more than that at this point.
The Basic Court in Danilovgrad will not be abolished
Will the basic courts in Žabljak and Danilovgrad be definitively abolished, in accordance with the "Plan for the rationalization of the judicial network" of the Ministry of Justice, given that the authorities in those municipalities oppose it?
The goal of rationalizing the judicial network is not to leave any municipality without courts, employees without jobs, and citizens without access to court, but to find a model that will be sustainable for the smooth functioning of courts. This primarily means the transformation of individual courts into divisions of some more numerous, and not too far away courts by geographical distance. Therefore, employees will not be left without jobs, nor will citizens have to go to other municipalities "for justice". On the contrary! We will know which courts will be transformed into departments at the beginning of 2025, but I can say with certainty that it will not be the Basic Court in Danilovgrad.
635 detainees in UIKS, decision on prison in Mojkovac soon
How many people are detained in the Administration for the Execution of Criminal Sanctions (UIKS), in what conditions are they staying and will a new prison be built or will existing capacities be expanded?
There are currently 635 detainees in the Administration for the Execution of Criminal Sanctions, of which 530 detainees are in the Podgorica Remand Prison, and 105 detainees in the detention unit of the Bijelo Polje prison.
When it comes to the conditions of detention of detained persons, in the current year special emphasis was placed on the expansion of accommodation capacities and the improvement of the existing material conditions for the life of detained persons. Activities were continuously undertaken to improve material conditions, namely through reconstruction, construction, adaptation, rehabilitation of buildings and/or rooms in buildings. During the previous year, more than 40 rooms where detained persons stay were adapted.
In this connection, in order to improve the conditions, the accommodation facilities were also expanded. In the Podgorica Remand Prison, the health care sector clinics were moved from the premises of the Remand Prison building to a newly built facility, which increased the accommodation capacity of the Remand Prison by an additional 60 places. In addition, the authorities in the Administration for the Execution of Criminal Sanctions took additional measures to ensure adequate conditions for the accommodation of detained persons. Namely, it was decided that all prisoners from the Prison for Short Sentences will be moved to the Prison for Long Sentences, and that the entire accommodation capacity of the Prison for Short Sentences, which is 175 places, will be given over to the accommodation of detained persons.
When it comes to the new facility of the Investigation Prison, in addition to the aforementioned measures and activities, the Administration for the Execution of Criminal Sanctions launched an initiative to build a new facility of the detention unit in the UIKS complex in Spuz, which was supported by the Ministry of Justice, as well as the Government. , which will plan the realization of this project with the capital budget. The facility will be designated for the accommodation of detained persons from the area of organized crime with the most modern technical security equipment, bearing in mind the high degree of security risk for detained persons who will be accommodated in this facility. The new facility will have an accommodation capacity of about 200 places, and we appreciate that with this project we will be able to fully meet all the needs related to the accommodation of detained persons in accordance with the prescribed standards.
With the support of the EU-IPA project from 2018 in the amount of EUR 4.378.311,00, and partly with funds from the Capital Budget in the amount of EUR 9.138.42,00, which in total amounts to more than EUR 13.516.733,00, the works on four new buildings, which began in March 2023, namely: special health institutions for the execution of security measures, mandatory psychiatric treatment and custody in a health facility, mandatory treatment of drug addicts and alcoholics, as well as treatment of persons in the UIKS, who have an acute mental illness; multifunctional facility designed for religious, cultural, sports and recreational activities of persons deprived of liberty; of the open-type prison facility of the new main application form.
The construction of the aforementioned objects will significantly improve the security system, improve the accommodation and residence conditions of persons deprived of their liberty, as well as the material and technical working conditions of officials.
The physical progress of the works is 80% on the building of the open prison, 60% on the facility of the special health facility, 22% on the multifunctional facility and five percent on the application form. According to an optimistic projection that takes into account the physical progress of all facilities, we can say that the total physical progress is 55 percent. The reason for the limited overall progress is the impossibility of carrying out the works due to the high-voltage transmission lines passing over three of the four buildings under construction. We expect that this problem will soon be overcome and that after that the work will continue at an accelerated pace.
As for the prison in Mojkovac, the decision will be made in the first months of next year.
I could hardly work if I were concerned with my own safety
The police security was increased for you after you made a decision at the end of August to extradite its citizen Binali Camgoz, suspected of several serious crimes, to Turkey. You said that threats to you because of that decision came from Montenegro, from people who are related to Camgoz. Is your safety still at risk, and what do the latest assessments of your safety say?
I don't think about it, this job requires making difficult and responsible decisions, but also trust in the institutions with which you cooperate, and if I were to look back at the issues of my own security - I would hardly be able to exercise elementary competences. The competent authorities carry out the work they are in charge of and take care of it, including my security assessment, which I am regularly familiar with under the label "secret", so I would not be able to disclose the details to the public. I am absolutely sure that nothing from those reports affects my regular work, which, at least while I am in this position, is the only thing that matters.
See more:
Download the app and follow the news
FOLLOW US ON
