Constitutional amendments to the judiciary are of key importance for European integration, but they should be substantial and adopted with social consensus, it was announced at the panel discussion "What do constitutional amendments bring to the judiciary?", organized by the Center for Democratic Transition (CDT).
Minister of Justice Bojan Božović said that the Government, in communication with the European Commission (EC) and international partners, received a recommendation that the Constitution should be amended in such a way that the Prosecutorial Council becomes a constitutional category, and that this should not be controversial for the Judicial Council.
"One of the obligations for closing the chapter is accepting these EC recommendations, most of which are more than seven or eight years old. We stuck to the principle and proposed that this be transposed into the Constitution, without the minister being part of the Judicial Council," said Božović.
He added that the Government has committed itself not to participate in the work of the Judicial Council.
Božović stated that it is good that both the Judicial and Prosecutorial Councils be part of the Constitution.
"And that the formal and legal influence of the executive branch on the prosecutorial and judicial branches is further reduced and formally abolished, with the exception that a representative of the Ministry of Justice will have a role in the Judicial Council," said Božović.
He said that Montenegro would not have received IBAR if it had not been fulfilled that the minister no longer participates in the work of the Judicial Council.
Speaking about the professionalization of the judiciary, Božović said that these topics do not occupy the same level of public debate as some other issues.
"The only way for the judiciary to be cleansed of political influence is to strengthen the judiciary. We as a society must create better conditions for that. If someone wants to abuse a norm, they will abuse it regardless of how it is written," said Božović.
Asked whether it was possible to reach a consensus, Božović said that it was realistic because the recommendations were not from yesterday.
"Both the opposition and the government are aware of the recommendations. It was a matter of time before someone would address these issues. I am always in favor of public hearings. The Ministry of Justice always holds them, we have not made exceptions," added Božović.
Member of the Judicial Council, Miodrag Iličković, said that the intention of the amendments to the Constitution is to free the Prosecutorial and Judicial Councils from political influence.
He stated that this was attempted in 2013.
"I was delighted. The opposite happened. It was all packaged up, and then the government realized that they would transfer enormous power to the judiciary and the Constitutional Court, that ultimately the judiciary would become a very powerful branch of government, and then they made a convulsion, they elected the obedient at the expense of quality," said Iličković.
He said that the government at the time brought in people who had never entered a courtroom and did not have a bar exam.
"But they were a safe vote. The manner was, let's choose five safe votes, and we'll have two who will write separate opinions, creating a mimicry of all that," said Iličković.
He stated that the situation was similar in the prosecutor's office.
"Safe guys were brought in, the matter was formally concluded as Europe requires, and we finished the job for ourselves," Iličković said.
Speaking about current proposals for changes to the Constitution, Iličković said that "it is a disgrace to slaughter an ox for a kilo of meat."
"If we were to change the Constitution for these things, I think we have a perfectly good normative framework," said Iličković.
As he added, he is against the Minister of Justice not participating in the Judicial Council.
"He doesn't have to influence the careers of judges, but the minister is needed, he has responsibilities for finances and the budget," said Iličković.
He added that the proposed changes to include more judges and fewer prominent lawyers in the council do not bring anything special.
"The balance of having more judges and fewer reputable lawyers also brings something special. Judges are responsible to their colleagues who elected them, to protect the profession, reputable lawyers to the parliament that elected them, that's a great balance," said Iličković.
Asked what would happen if the changes to the Constitution were made too quickly, Iličković said that "our acceleration has lasted 25 years."
"And we haven't changed anything fundamentally, the problem is in the mimicry we have in relation to that, this misrepresentation of things. You think that some judges don't know what the practice of the European Court is, they do, but it's better to resent the European Court than someone at home," Iličković said.
He said that there must be a consensus in society to say "is this fair?"
"We need to elect independent people, because you never know what kind of situation you will find yourself in," Iličković concluded.
Attorney Siniša Gazivoda reminded that the Venice Commission (VC) said that two things should be taken into account - to prevent corporatism, or complete closure.
"That all government must come from the will of the people, so that the influence of parliament is not lost," he said.
Gazivoda added that the second thing VK pointed out was politicization, or excessive political influence.
He said that the conversation must continue and is constantly happening.
"Although in my opinion it would be bad if, for the sake of the European agenda, we skipped something and wrote into the Constitution some things that will remain there for more than a decade, our Constitution is tough and it is not easy to change," said Gazivoda.
He said that it would be good to consider professionalizing both the Judicial and Prosecutorial Councils.
"Not to terminate the mandate of the current ones, but for the future, like what is being done with the Central Election Commission. The jurisdiction of the Judicial and Prosecutorial Councils has so much work that they would have something to do every day, all day long," said Gazivoda.
He believes that self-censorship is one of the important factors that negatively affect the judiciary.
"What I think is happening as a negative impact in a certain number of cases is self-censorship, from the great pressure created by politics, and these are not circumstances in which it is easy to judge and work," said Gazivoda.
He reiterated that there should be a public debate on certain matters and a good intention to translate everything into law.
See more:
Download the app and follow the news
FOLLOW US ON
