The Speaker of the National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia, Prof. Dr Slavica Djukic-Dejanovic, set Tuesday, 7 December 2010, starting at 3 p.m., as a Day to respond to deputies’ questions regarding the current issue: “Resolving the problems arisen in the judiciary reform process”, proposed by the Liberal Democratic Party Deputy Group.

Prime Minister of the Republic of Serbia Mirko Cvetkovic, Minister of Justice Snezana Malovic and President of the High Judicial Council Nata Mesarovic responded to the questions.

The questions were posed by deputy Cedomir Jovanovic, Laszlo Varga, Velimir Ilic, Tomislav Nikolic, Milos Aligrudic, Vjerica Radeta, Riza Halimi, Miroslav Petkovic, Zoran Krasic, Vlatko Ratkovic, Srdjan Spasojevic, Milica Radovic, Judita Popovic, Petar Jojic, Srdjan Milivojevic, Zlata Djeric, Sreto Peric, Srdjan Mikovic, Pavel Marcok and Djura Mucenski.

Deputy Cedomir Jovanovic asked Minister of Justice Snezana Malovic whether the Government of the Republic of Serbia was ready to protect the elected judges and eliminate all the problems and criticisms of the judiciary that seem justified. Jovanovic also asked President of the High Judicial Council Nata Mesarovic how big were the obstacles to the normal operation of the High Judicial Council.

Minister of Justice Malovic expressed her belief that the Government was ready to protect the bearers of judiciary functions, judges and prosecutors, as well as eliminate the judiciary reform problems pointed out by the European Commission.

President of the High Judicial Council Mesarovic reminded all present that the High Judicial Council was a body established under the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia of 2006 and as such is an independent an autonomous organ whose competence or highest responsibility lies in the process of election and dismissal of judges. After its constitution, the High Judicial Council neither commenced nor made any decisions regarding the election of judges until it received the decision of the Constitutional Court on 9 July 2009, and it abided by the Constitution, Constitutional Law, Law on Judges, Law on the High Judicial Council and respected all the Constitutional Court decisions.

In addition, deputy Cedomir Jovanovic asked Minister Malovic whether the way the judiciary reform was implemented was good enough. Secondly, he asked whether they have ascertained how it was possible that one version of the Law on the High Judiciary Council was sent to the Venetian Commission, and another version of the Law forwarded to the Assembly. Jovanovic also wanted to know whether the current number of judges was sufficient for the normal functioning of the judiciary.

Deputy Laszlo Varga opined that the positive ruling of the European Commission, in addition to the cooperation with the Hague Tribunal, primarily depends on the elimination of the flaws of the judiciary reform. In addition to the revised election of judges, the deputy wanted to know if the court network would be reorganized i.e. whether the judiciary considers eliminating court units or recovering the status of courts to a certain number of court units.

Minister Malovic stressed that the judiciary would not impede further European integrations and restated that some of the judiciary flaws would be eliminated in agreement with the European Commission. Malovic disagreed with the opinion that the court network should be revised at this moment. She added that it would be discussed in future and the appropriate decisions would be made depending on the citizens’ needs.

Deputy Velimir Ilic asked if the judiciary reform was implemented in the manner agreed on with the EU and who was responsible for the reform being primarily party oriented.

The Minister pointed out that both Serbia and the international community believed the judiciary reform was needed and necessary. Minister Malovic refuted the claim that the judiciary reform was politicized adding that the reform was aimed at diminishing and eliminating political influence.

Deputy Tomislav Nikolic wanted to know why representatives of the Judges’ Association of Serbia and Association of Public Prosecutors and Deputy Public Prosecutors were not invited to today’s sitting. The deputy asked why the Ministry of Justice had concealed the letter by Stefan Fule and Vivian Reding, Vice-President of the European Commission for Justice, Fundamental Rights and Citizenship, of 16 March 2010.

Minister Malovic refuted the deputy’s statement explaining that the Ministry of Justice did not conceal the letter of European Commissioner Fule and Reding, but it shared the letter with the interested parties in line with their request for access to information of public importance.

Deputy Milos Aligrudic asked when and how the Serbian legislation would be adjusted according to the opinions of the Venetian Commission and Council of Europe.

Minister Malovic quoted parts of the report the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe had sent to the Ministry of Justice on 19 August. The report states that “the previous system was badly constructed and not truly functional. That is why reform was necessary in many aspects”. Then, ”the Ministry of Justice had made considerable efforts and was intensively engaged on implementing the national judiciary reform strategy adopted by the Assembly in 2005”, as well as “the Ministry stated that the proposed reforms were comprehensive, and considering the need for a speedy implementation of so many of the reforms, it was rather inescapable that there may have been some mistakes. However, the Ministry is ready to deal with the problems stemming from the implementation of the reform”.

Deputy Vjerica Radeta asked Minister Malovic what she would discuss with the non-elected judges.

Minister Malovic reminded the deputies that the procedure for the general election of judges is not contrary to the Constitution, which is also the opinion of the Constitutional Court. She added that in July 2009, before the general elections, the Constitutional Court gave its opinion to the submitted initiatives by the Judges’ Association to some of the provisions of the Law and in its ruling stated that the existing continuity of judicature was terminated in 2006. Malovic responded that, in the interview with the non-elected judges she would do the same as the Constitutional Court.

Deputy Riza Halimi raised the question of rationalization which was one of the most important criteria of the judiciary reform citing the example of the Vranje court, where Halimi believes the previous practice of having some case processed at the municipal courts in Presevo and Bujanovac would be simpler and more rational. At the same time, the deputy mentioned the issue of implementing the constitutional norm of the parallel usage of Albanian and Serbian language.

Minister Malovic highlighted the existence of continuous dialogue about the functioning of the court in Vranje and the court unit in Presevo, adding that so far the court unit in Presevo was functioning well but the Ministry of Justice was willing to hear suggestions and comments aimed at improving its operation. In addition, she believes that the Ministry of Justice has done its best, within its purview, to respect the multiethnic principle, adding that the multiethnic principle has appeared in the judiciary laws for the first time.

Deputy Miroslav Petkovic stressed that his criticism of the judiciary reform is not a politically motivated attack on the Serbian judiciary but a wish to find those responsible and truly culpable for the situation in the judiciary. Petkovic asked how much has been done within the judiciary reform.

Minister Malovic shared the statistical data demonstrating that in the first six months the commercial courts have resolved 30% more cases than in the same period last year. In addition, all the judges in the commercial appellate court have ruled in 20% more cases and the number of cases older than two years at the commercial appellate court was decreased by 84% in the period January-June 2010 compared to the same period in 2009. Malovic stressed that these results have been achieved with fewer judges, and one of the basic goals of the judiciary reform was to achieve court efficiency.

Deputy Zoran Krasic asked what the Ministry of Justice planned to do about the further judiciary reform.

Minister Malovic repeated that judiciary reform is a complex process, one part a general election, and one part change in the work process, adding that the reform has changed the organization of work. Talking about the general election, the Minister added that there are some open issues that are yet to be addressed. About the amendments of procedure laws, she reminded that the last amendment to the Criminal Procedure Code was just the first step in the amendment of criminal procedure legislation and that the reform would be led by the experiences of the countries of continental Europe which has switched to the criminal procedure model where prosecutorial investigation is one of the key institutes. About civil procedure, the Minister pointed out that a task group would be formalized these days working on adjusting our civil procedure to a more modern mode of operation. The Law on Enforcement Procedure is currently before the Council of Europe and the Ministry of Justice is waiting for its opinion. In addition, a draft law on notaries public is being prepared, the Minister added expressing pleasure at the fact that appellate courts have been introduced into the Republic of Serbia.

Deputy Vlatko Ratkovic asked about the course of legislative initiative i.e. reforms in the field of right of trial in a reasonable deadline.

Minister Malovic reminded that the Ministry of Justice was currently working on a Law on Enforcement Procedure which will in future be called Law on Enforcement and Security. The Minister concluded that a process of standardizing the work of judges is necessary and that in the process they will be provided expert assistance, as well as and introduction of new technologies, and the deadlines would be set in accordance with these norms.

Deputy Srdjan Spasojevic had a question about the lawsuit for non-material damages in the purview of the First Basic Court in Novi Sad.

President of the High Judicial Council Nata Mesarovic responded that she was unable to talk about that specific case and that she did not remember if she had received such a complaint.

Deputy Milica Radovic asked on what basis had the High Judicial Council ruled on the election of judges of the First Basic Court when the Minutes of the 21^st sitting of the High Judicial Council differ from the final list of judges.

President of the High Judicial Council Nata Mesarovic explained that if two applicants applied for one vacancy, the better candidate was selected. She cited the example of Uzicka Pozega Basic Court and Pozarevac Commercial Court where everyone applied for just one court, there were 32 judges and 30 vacancies. In this situation some of the candidates if they had not applied for another position, remained superfluous. Mesarovic added that every applicant was discussed and all statistical data was checked.

National Assembly Deputy Speaker Judita Popovic stated that, contrary to article 215 of the Rules of Procedure, due to a live football match broadcast, part of the sitting would be aired subsequently. Popovic asked what was done to prevent the obstruction of the judiciary reform.

Minister Malovic stated that the judiciary reform was under attack. It might have been justified for the most part as it came from some professional associations and related to the manner the procedure was implemented, but very often the attacks were neither motivated by nor come from these circles, but form persons impacted by the judiciary reform, concluded Malovic.

Deputy Petar Jojic asked about the criteria employed by the High Judicial Council members in the election of judges.

Minister Malovic repeated that the non-elected judges were sent individual explanations setting out the criteria of qualification, competence and worthiness, elaborated in the Rulebook on the criteria for the election, promotion and dismissal of judges, applied to each individual case. The Minister added that each non-elected judge in Serbia could see the reasons why he/she had not been elected. In addition, a public debate was held at the Constitutional Court about some of the judges in which anyone could have taken part - the media, interested parties or Serbian citizens.

Deputy Srdjan Milivojevic asked how far the investigation of judge Simeunovic’s case has come. Milivojevic also wanted to know whether there would be disciplinary action against those who had allowed the expiration of the statue of limitation of some cases and what the value was of the property seized so far under the implementation of the Law on Seizure and Confiscation of Proceeds from Crime.

Minister Malovic reminded that the implementation of the Law on Seizure and Confiscation of Proceeds from Crime started in 2006 and since then 300 billion EUR worth of property has been seized.

Deputy Zlata Djeric asked about the cost of the judiciary reform in total, including salaries.

Minister Malovic reminded that the Serbian judicature was funded from two sources – the budget and court fees. 60% of the court fees are colloquially returned to the judiciary, while 13 billion RSD is allocated from the budget, and about six billion comes from said court fees. The judiciary budget has been cut by 15% compared to 2008. Malovic stressed that the judiciary reform incurred no extra cost to the citizens of Serbia, and the salary increase after the employees’ strike came from the judiciary budget and no additional funds had been secured for the purpose.

Deputy Sreto Peric asked whether any cases had been misplaced in the judiciary reform and establishment of the new judiciary network.

Deputy Srdjan Mikovic asked how the information system would help increase the transparency of the court proceedings and rulings and about the possible introduction of revenue stamps.

The Minister of Justice reminded the deputies that one of the goals of the judiciary reform was the manner of enforcement and changing the organisation of work, and that the reform and introduction of the Automatic Case Processing Programme would greatly contribute to that end. This programme was introduced into commercial courts, and now into business courts as well. That actually means that when they visit the web presentation of any business court, Serbian citizens can have insight into certain cases. The plan is to establish a network of all court units by the end of next year meaning that by the end of 2011 the entire Serbian judiciary would be part of the network, the Minister concluded.

Deputy Pavel Marcok said that according to some data the Serbian court practice has shown that before the reform 80% of prison sentences pronounced for corruption were under the legal minimum. The deputy wanted to know what the situation was like now.

Minister Malovic said that in 2010, 45% of prison sentences for the crime of murder referred to in article 113 of the Criminal Code were on the border or below it, compared to 58% in 2008. In addition, it was particularly significant that in 2010, 55% of prison sentences were within the legal limits, compared to a mere 17% in 2008.

Deputy Djura Mucenski asked whether after the judiciary reform there were mechanisms to somehow decrease the number of judges who do not do their job satisfactorily so as to increase the efficiency of the judiciary system.

President of the High Judicial Council Nata Mesarovic responded that the High Judicial Council had elected judges able to estimate what is in the interest of the society they live in and by their work help eradicate crime and ensure the safety of the citizens of Serbia and their property.

Having gone through the list of deputies who applied to ask questions on the current issue, the National Assembly Speaker Prof. Dr Slavica Djukic-Dejanovic thanked the Prime Minister, Minister of Justice and President of the High Judicial Council on the behalf of the deputies and herself, for participating.