The Administrative Court has not yet asked the Government to declare itself on the lawsuit filed by the Minister of Internal Affairs Danilo Saranovic (Democrats) because of her decision to nominate Aleksandar Radović for the chief of police, because the procedure for assessing the orderliness of the lawsuit is ongoing.
This is what the judge and spokeswoman of the Administrative Court told "Vijesta" yesterday Ivana Boricic.
"At the moment, the Administrative Court can only confirm the information that the minister has filed a lawsuit against the Government to annul the decision on the appointment of Radović as Acting Director of the Police Directorate (UP). The procedure for preliminary examination of the claim is ongoing, and in accordance with the provisions of the Law on Administrative Disputes, after evaluating the orderliness of the claim, it is submitted for a response to the defendant, who is obliged to answer and submit all documents within a period determined by the court, which cannot be shorter than eight , nor longer than 30 days. After all the legal prerequisites are met, the court will make a decision in this administrative matter", said Boričić.
"Vijesti" asked the Administrative Court if they had submitted Šaranović's lawsuit to the Government, if so - when, and if not - when do they intend to.
The executive branch elected Radović, the head of the Sector for Financial Intelligence, as the acting director of the UP by a majority of votes at the session on March 13, around three in the morning. This was done at the Prime Minister's suggestion Milojko Spajić (Movement Europe Now), not Minister Šaranović. According to the Law on Internal Affairs (Article 16 paragraph 4), the minister is exclusively competent to submit a proposal for the acting director of the UP to the Government, and the executive power as a collective body gives consent or not to such a proposal.
Šaranović filed the lawsuit a month ago (March 28), and in it he claims that the executive power, after rejecting his proposal to head the police Lazar Scepanovic, illegally authorized Spajić to propose a new candidate, that he illegally proposed Radović and that this is why that police officer was illegally elected to the position.
The minister is therefore asking the court to annul the decision on the appointment of Radović, citing incorrect application of substantive law, violation of procedural rules and wrongly determined factual situation as the reasons for this.
Although some lawyers claim that Šaranović did not have active identification (legal authority) to file a lawsuit, but that it could have been done by one of the candidates who were not elected as police chief, the minister stated that his identification derives, among other things, from the provisions of the Law on Administrative Disputes (Article 10 paragraph 1). It states that the plaintiff in an administrative dispute is a natural or legal person who believes that a right or legal interest has been violated by an administrative act or other administrative activity.
Šaranović assessed that it is not disputed that he is a party in the administrative proceedings because the process of electing the chief of police was conducted according to his proposal, "and the obtained status of a party in the administrative proceedings, according to already established court practice, cannot be lost in an administrative dispute".
According to the Law on Administrative Disputes (Article 21), if the claim is incomplete or incomprehensible, the Administrative Court will invite the plaintiff to eliminate the deficiencies and will point out the consequences of failure to act.
"If the prosecutor does not remove the deficiencies in the lawsuit within the time limit, and the deficiencies are such that they prevent the work of the Administrative Court, the court will reject the lawsuit as improper. Exceptionally from para. 1 and 2 of this article, if the lawsuit filed by the attorney who is a lawyer, the protector of the property and legal interests of Montenegro, the municipal body responsible for the protection of the property and legal interests of the municipality, is incomplete or incomprehensible, the court will dismiss the lawsuit as improper. , it says in the law.
In that act (Article 22 paragraph 1 point 3) it is also stated that the court will reject the claim by decision if it determines that it is obvious that the administrative act or other administrative activity contested by it does not affect the right of the plaintiff or his legal interest.
Saranović also stated in the lawsuit that the decision on the appointment of Radović does not contain a regulation from which the legal basis for its adoption arises. He reminded that the Government bases its decision on the Law on Civil Servants and State Employees, the Law on Internal Affairs and its conclusion of March 13, when Radović was appointed. However, he claims that the appointment cannot be based on those acts.
Radović's appointment to the post of UP head culminated in a months-long smoldering conflict between the Europe Now Movement and the Democrats regarding staffing in the security sector. That is why the Democrats pledged their support to the Government until receiving the IBAR (Report on the Fulfillment of Interim Benchmarks), which is expected in June.
Bonus video:
