Action for Human Rights (HRA) is exerting continuous pressure on the judges of the Supreme Court, immediately before the vote to determine the proposal for the election of the president, which is unacceptable, said Acting President of the Supreme Court Vesna Vučković.
She said this on the occasion of HRA's statement in which, among other things, they stated that they believe that the number of votes needed to determine the proposal for the election of the President of the Supreme Court is 11, and not 13, as announced by Vučković.
DON'T MISS IT
"Action for human rights presents a series of statements that are unfounded, arbitrary, and thus lead to misleading the public about the true state of affairs and the procedure for nominating a candidate for the president of the Supreme Court of Montenegro by the General Session of the Supreme Court of Montenegro," writes Vučković in his response, which submitted by the Public Relations Service at the Supreme Court of Montenegro.
They stated that the decision on the number of judges in the Montenegrin judiciary ("Official Gazette of Montenegro", no. 25/15, 62/15, 47/16, 83/16, 79/18 and 54/19), "provided that is the president of the court and 18 judges in the Supreme Court."
"Article 34 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Session of the Supreme Court of Montenegro stipulates that, for the election of the President of the Supreme Court, a candidate who received a two-thirds majority of the total number of judges of the Supreme Court is proposed. The total number of Supreme Court judges is 19, which was not disputed in none of the previous elections, so that the two-thirds majority is 13 votes, which was also established in the minutes of the General Session of the Supreme Court of Montenegro No. 81/21-I of March 31.03.2021, 14, when voting for the then candidate Supreme Court judge Miraš Radović, when the court had XNUMX judges, and the candidate Miraš Radović received the votes of all the judges present. He did not," says Vučković.
The general session, as she said, counted on a two-thirds majority of 14 judges, "as many as there were in the Supreme Court at that time, which is emphasized in the text, even then a two-thirds majority of 19 judges was counted."
"A candidate needs to get 13 votes in order to be proposed to the Judicial Council by the General Session of the Supreme Court, so it is known how many votes the candidate needs to have. This is not the method of Mrs. Vučković, as stated in the text, but the judge of the General Session of the Supreme Court of the court, which has always been applied until now. Therefore, the same method was applied in relation to Dr. Vesna Vučković, as a candidate for the president of the Supreme Court, at the General Session held on January 17.01.2023, 19. It is not logical that a two-thirds majority is determined ad hoc it arose from the interpretation of the HRA, and that it is changed at this moment, when there is already a position taken, that it is counted from XNUMX judges, because that is the total number of judges. The Rules of Procedure of the General Session of the Supreme Court do not stipulate that number of elected judges, but from the "total number of judges", she specified.
As Vučković said, the statements in the text are arbitrary, "that it is inadmissible that the Supreme Court did not amend the Rules of Procedure of the General Session and specify the rules on voting and the number of votes needed to determine the proposal."
"At the General Session of the judges of the Supreme Court held on April 03.04.2024, 20, the Committee for Amendments and Supplements to the Rules of Procedure of the General Session was elected, with the task of determining the Proposed Rules of Procedure within XNUMX days from the day of the election and the holding of the session, and having "I see that the Judicial Council made a decision to publish a Public Advertisement for the election of the President of the Supreme Court of Montenegro," she added.
According to her, there is no statement in the text that the acting president of the court announced the amendment of the Rules of Procedure of the General Session on March 15, 2024, "because it was at the General Session held on April 03.04.2024, XNUMX."
"The Judicial Council of Montenegro announced a public advertisement for the election of the President of the Supreme Court of Montenegro on April 01.04.2024, 04.04.2024, which was published on the website of the Judicial Council on April 03.04.2024, XNUMX, and the General Session was held the day before, on April XNUMX. XNUMX," she said.
She specified that the Committee for Amendments to the Rules of Procedure of the General Session "did not undertake or submit within 20 days from the day of the General Session the Proposal of Rules of Procedure, because the Public Advertisement was ongoing, so the changes to the rules and procedures are ongoing while the procedure according to the Public Advertisement is ongoing, I cannot change it."
"In relation to, as they state in the text, the "unsolved problem", the question of whether a candidate judge should vote for himself or not, because that rule was also applied differently, it should be noted that the Rules of Procedure of the General Session of the Supreme Court prescribe in Article 9 paragraph 2, that "Judges and the president of the court have the right to vote". Candidate Ana Vuković, a judge of the Supreme Court of Montenegro, has the right to vote. Candidate Miodrag Pešić is not a judge of the Supreme Court, so according to the provision of Article 9 paragraph 2 of the Rules of Procedure. "Whether this puts them in an unequal position is a question that, in life, has not been there until now because the candidates for the president of the Supreme Court have always been judges of the Supreme Court, so this question was not raised as a dispute," Vučković added.
She stated that the Supreme Court, after a detailed analysis of all issues that appear, as disputed or unclear and incomplete, in connection with the work of the General Session after submission of the Draft Rules of Procedure by the Commission, will propose solutions that will not, as she said, create dilemmas in their application.
"On the other hand, such remarks and interpretations by the non-governmental organization HRA were not presented before, i.e. when there were other candidates for the presidency, including me, which creates suspicion that this non-governmental organization bases its interpretations on the basis of the registered candidates," she concluded. .
Bonus video:
