Write, erase and sigh – the verses of a children’s song about the struggles of schoolchildren in Serbia could accompany the adoption of a set of laws.
A package of five amendments to judicial laws, colloquially called Mrdić’s Laws according to the proponent, it was heavily criticized for its rapid adoption and fears that it would allow greater influence of the executive power on the actions and selection of prosecutors.
Adopted in the midst of several investigations into the corruption of high-ranking state officials, since January this set of laws has undergone several revisions under pressure from the European Union, so that the final version will be presented to the deputies on June 17.
A week later, the assembly adopted the final version, with the votes of government representatives.
Even that new version, however, did not fully meet the EU’s request – to be in accordance with the recommendations of the expert body of the Council of Europe – the Venice Commission.
Of the nine recommendations made by this body on the text of the regulations, seven were adopted while two were not fully adopted, she announced Venice Commission on June 16.
Meanwhile, one of the outstanding recommendations has also been fulfilled.
The amended text of the regulations shows that the Government and MPs are “ready to take further steps in the reform of the judiciary”, said Minister of Justice Nenad Vujić.
The laws are now mostly returning to the old, before changes, says Lidija Komlen Nikolić from the Association of Prosecutors of Serbia.
“If the laws are adopted in the version that is on the website of the Parliament of Serbia, they will not be in conflict with EU standards.
“It was important to implement the recommendations in order to restore the mechanisms that protect the independence of public prosecutors,” says Komlen Nikolić.
Some lawyers claimed in the previous days that the version of the law that was in the Serbian Parliament was not the same as the one that was sent to the Venice Commission, which the government representatives rejected.
‘Cracked wings’ to the prosecutors
And that previous situation was positively evaluated by Brussels in earlier reports.
When, however, they were adopted Mrdić’s Lawsnamed after SNS MP Uglješa Mrdić, the EU reacted strongly, and the Commissioner for Enlargement Marta Kos questioned the further payment of European money to Serbia.
“The speed and method of adoption Mrdić’s lawsas well as the fact that their content affected the independence of the judiciary as a whole, caused a sharp reaction from the European Union,” says Komlen Nikolić.
“The solutions mostly related to the public prosecution and were obviously aimed at reducing the independence, as well as weakening the capacity of the Prosecutor’s Office for Organized Crime (TOK),” adds the prosecutor of the Appellate Public Prosecutor’s Office in Belgrade.
Since last year, TOK has initiated several procedures involving high-ranking state officials – since the case canopy‘ to General Staff.
“This is a special message to public prosecutors, to be careful about who they initiate criminal proceedings against,” says Komlen Nikolić.
TOK is investigating the flow of money for the modernization of the railway line from Novi Sad to the border with Hungary, which also included the demolished canopy, and in that process the responsibility of former ministers Tomislav Momirović and Goran Vesić was investigated.
TOK has also filed an indictment against the Minister of Culture, Nikola Selaković, for revoking the status of cultural property of the General Staff, and the trial is ongoing.
“Mrdić’s laws gave greater powers to the heads of prosecutions and to the senior prosecutor in Belgrade, which strengthened the wings of prosecutors working on cases,” says Aleksandar Trešnjev, judge of the criminal department of the High Court and president of the Center for Judicial Research.
“They are still conducting investigations independently, but it is necessary to limit the interference of superiors in their work.”
Returning the prosecutors to TOK
Original version Mrdić’s laws it also opened the way for TOK to remain without four prosecutors.
And that is probably the most visible consequence of their application so far.
In the meantime, two prosecutors were returned, while the fate of two more hung in the air, which was also discussed by the Venice Commission.
Two prosecutors who were not returned to the TOK worked on cases of canopies and confiscation of marijuana in Konjuh, she conveyed television N1.
They are exactly the ones mentioned by the Venice Commission in the last published recommendations.
In the meantime, a session of the High Prosecutor’s Council was held, and they were returned to the TOK.
Minister Vujić rejected accusations that the government wanted to weaken this prosecution.
In the first opinion of the Venice Commission, published in April, it was indicated that the Prosecutor’s Office for organized crime should be strengthened in terms of personnel, which was done by sending a larger number of prosecutors than was the case before, the minister said before the deputies.
What (yet) has not been changed in Mrdić’s laws?
Another recommendation that the Venice Commission states has not yet been fulfilled concerns the organization of the Prosecutor’s Office for High-Tech Crime (VTK).
Mrdić’s Laws they envisioned the VTK to be a department within the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office (VJT).
VJT is headed by Nenad Stefanović, who is often accused by the opposition and some lawyers of being loyal to President Vučić and the Serbian Progressive Party.
Mrdić’s laws imply that the organization of the Prosecutor’s Office for High-Tech Crime is changing, by changing the rules of who appoints the head of the VTK and to whom he is responsible, Katrina Golubović, a Jukom lawyer, previously told BBC.
“Until now, everything has been in the hands of the Supreme Public Prosecutor Zagorka Dolovac, and with the proposal, she is dispossessed and Nenad Stefanović takes over her authority.”
“The government is moving towards greater control over the prosecution of crimes committed on the Internet,” Golubović emphasized.
The Venice Commission recommended that a special department for high-tech crime be given “greater structural and operational autonomy”.
The fulfillment of this recommendation “requires a certain amount of time”, pointed out Minister Vujić.
It is an amendment to the Law on High-tech Crime, because it does not only include the prosecution, but also the courts, the police and other institutions that deal with that area, he added.
“So far, the solution has been improved in terms of the way of appointing the head of the department,” says prosecutor Komlen Nikolić.
What are the consequences of Mrdić’s laws?
Application Mrdić’s laws in previous months, however, it still had tangible consequences in cases in which the public was particularly interested.
Recently, the prosecutor of the First Basic Prosecutor’s Office filed an indictment against a female police officer for abusing and torturing a student protest participant at the beginning of July last year.
The policewoman dragged the student by her hair, as an eyewitness lawyer Luka Vodinelić spoke earlier for the BBC.
The chief prosecutor of the First Basic Public Prosecutor’s Office in Belgrade ordered the prosecutor who handled the case to postpone the criminal prosecution.
In practice, this means that the accused policewoman can end the proceedings by paying at least 400,000 dinars to the victim or for humanitarian purposes.
The acting prosecutor appealed, but the chief prosecutor of the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office in Belgrade rejected her complaint, says Komlen Nikolić.
“The complaint was decided within the hierarchy of the public prosecutor’s office,” he adds.
Adopting the recommendations of the Venice Commission, which call for non-hierarchical decision-making, avoids situations in which superior individuals decide independently in such situations.
Komlen Nikolić explains that the multi-member Commission of the High Prosecution Council is being re-established as a working body, which is outside the hierarchical organization.
Regarding the abuse during the protest last year, the Belgrade Center for Human Rights announced that “the injured student, who was recognized as a particularly sensitive witness, is expressly opposed” to ending the proceedings by applying this institute of delaying criminal prosecution.
This would “have the effect of ending the case without a judicial examination of responsibility for the abuse she suffered,” the statement added.
BBC is in Serbian from now on and on YouTube, follow us HERE.
Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube and Viber. If you have a topic suggestion for us, please contact us (email protected)
