Pešić: Judges are not afraid of vetting, it is possible to implement it without changing the Constitution

Instead of April, judges and prosecutors received the promised 30 percent salary increase at the end of the spring session of the Parliament a few days ago. This increase is only temporary, until a law is adopted that will resolve their status issues, including retirement, says the president of the Judges' Association, Miodrag Pešić, who initiated the initiative for the salary increase.

"And it must be accompanied by an increase in the salaries of all employees in the judicial system, because the salaries of employees in the judicial branch of government, primarily in the administration, are at a very low level and something must be done urgently," said Pešić.

However, during the debate in Parliament, some ruling parties sharply criticized the increase in salaries for justice providers, mentioning certain judges and prosecutors who, they say, do not deserve it at all.

"Increasing judges' salaries is not a reward for an individual, but an investment for all those who perform their jobs with honor and dedication. And I believe that the judicial branch of government has the most of them. If we have some individuals, there are mechanisms that would be used if there is any evidence against them, I mean disciplinary and criminal proceedings," Pešić pointed out.

Vetting of the judiciary has long been desired by some in the government, and after the latest criminal clashes on the streets, Prime Minister Milojko Spajić has announced it again.

Supreme Court President Valentina Pavličić said that they are ready for this procedure, within the framework of the law and the Constitution, but not for blackmail and pressure. The professional association has no objection to undergoing an extraordinary review, but without political influence.

"All judges who are members of the Judges' Association, and they make up over 70 percent of all judges in Montenegro, are not afraid of vetting. Whether it is justified is another question," Pešić added.

One of the key questions for the vetting to be implemented is whether it will be necessary to amend the Constitution.

"If we want to comply with all democratic standards, we would have to amend the Constitution. However, it should always be noted that it is not impossible to carry out the vetting process without amending the Constitution," Pešić assessed.

And while vetting is raised like a sword over the heads of judges and prosecutors every day, no one answers what the state wants to achieve with vetting.

"If we have identified that there is corruption, it must be targeted at corruption. If the problem is the integrity of judges, the integrity of judges must be checked. If the problem is that we do not have it, and we do not have public trust, let's see how we can build that public trust through the vetting process. It must be targeted, so that it does not turn into a general revision of the election of judges," said Pešić.

And there are quite a few verdicts that, in conjunction with inflammatory messages from politicians, have caused outrage among the public, including the acquittal for the robbery of the post office in Nikšić and the murder of Ljubiša Mrdak, for Telekom, for Miomir Mugoša for Customs, in the "Apartments" case, and for Marko Bata Carević for Krimovica.

"An atmosphere of expected verdict is created, and if it is not in line with the expectations of the created public opinion, it is not good. On the contrary, if we accepted such a narrative, we would not need courts. We would have a situation where the prosecution would file an indictment, and that would be the end of the story," Pešić points out.

And we will know whether the interest is pure or proper justice when we see the idea of vetting, translated into a legal text that should not, like some others, cause even the slightest controversy in the public.