Nacrt amandmana na ustavne odredbe o pravosuđu i mišljenje Venecijanske komisije br. 921/2018 o Nacrtu amandmana
Draft amendments to the constitutional provisions on the judiciary and opinion of the Venice Commision No. 921/2018 on the draft amandments

Author(s): Vida Petrović-Škero
Subject(s): Constitutional Law, Governance, Public Law, Evaluation research
Published by: Fondacija Centar za javno pravo
Keywords: Draft of the Amendment to the Constitution’s judicial articles; Venetian committee on the Amendment draft; Action plan for chapter 23; Ministry of Justice;
Summary/Abstract: The text analyses the Draft of the Amendment to the Constitution’s judicial articles and the opinion of the Venetian committee on the Amendment draft. After the consultancy process, The Ministry of justice published on 22nd January 2018 the working version of the Constitutional amendment draft, in line with the obligations RS accepted with the adoption of the Action plan for chapter 23. In February and March 2018 public debates were held on the changes in the Constitution that should have been the foundation for the Amendment draft. It is obvious that the Ministry of Justice was not guided by the majority of stated opinions neither in the public debate, nor in written texts when they wrote the Amendment draft. The Ministry has done the Amendment draft with no explanation. It remains vague why they accepted the solutions that are in defiance with many standards and are not in line with our standards. The Ministry of justice gave a written explanation, after which the Venetian committee during the 115 plenary session (Venice 22-23 Jun 2018) adopted the opinion No. 921/2018. For 29 amendments, Venetian committee gave over 40 recommendations, highlighting 8 main ones, referring to the membership of High counsel of judiciary, High counsel of prosecutors and the role of National assembly, dissolution of High counsel of judiciary, dismissal, unique law application and election and responsibilities of public prosecutors and deputy public prosecutors. By analyzing the given opinion, it cannot be concluded that we are ”on the good path” to provide de-politicization of the justice system and guarantee independence through the process of Constitution changes.

• Details
• Contents