Statement by EU Ambassador Lars-Gunnar Wigemark, following the HJPC conclusions of 26 October 2017 on the dismissal of judges and prosecutors (27/10/2017)

Statement by EU Ambassador Lars-Gunnar Wigemark, following the HJPC conclusions of 26 October 2017 on the dismissal of judges and prosecutors

• 27.10.2017.

The European Union takes note of the conclusions adopted by the High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council (HJPC) on 26 October 2017 in connection to the information submitted by the Centre for Investigating War and War Crime and Search for Missing Persons from Republika Srpska.

Certain of the conclusions adopted by the HJPC raise concerns and could directly affect the independence of judges and prosecutors as well as the respect of the fundamental rights.

Fair trial is prerequisite for public trust in the judicial system. The presumption of innocence is at the core of the fundamental rights protected by the European Union.

No public official, including judges and prosecutors, should be dismissed without a proper independent investigation and disciplinary procedures first being applied. The appropriate sanction should only be decided after such procedures have been conducted and the allegations against the officials found to be grounded in the law. Circumventing such procedures will limit the independence and impartiality of the judiciary and is not in line with EU standards.

As recently proposed by the EU experts, there is a need to improve the criteria for appointment and dismissal of officials, in line with EU standards.

And any such improvements need to take full account of the need to maintain the independence of judiciary as well as the respect of fundamental rights.

http://europa.ba/?p=53184

The blog author: The statement is the reaction to
 the conclusions adopted by the BaH High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council HJPC in relation to the Information filed by Republika Srpska Center for Investigation of War, War Crimes and Search for Missing Persons. The information included the names of 9 judges and 6 prosecutors reported on the grounds of discrimination of Serbs in the war crime proceedings, as well as the documentation about their war past making them biased or discreditable for performing independent judicial or prosecutorial function.

After discussing this Information a multi-ethnic HJPC as a body in charge of appointment of judges and prosecutors in BaH decided to undertake several urgent steps including the submission of the Information and documentation to the Office of Disciplinary Prosecutor and BaH Prosecutor's Office, requesting urgent proceedings. One of the most important conclusions is related to the initiation of the procedure of amendments of the Law on HJPC to introduce an exceptional, extraordinary measure for dismissal of a judge or prosecutor without a prior disciplinary procedure. The HJPC is to prepare the contents of this provision in line with the legal standards and requirements of the European Convention on Human Rights that will be submitted as a proposal to the relevant national institutions.

Petnaest sudija i tužilaca prijavljeno za diskriminaciju Srba/ Fifteen judges and prosecutors reported for the discrimination against Serbs (Nezavisne Novine and Glas Srpske 25.10.2017)

 https://www.nezavisne.com/novosti/bih/Petnaest-sudija-i-tuzilaca-prijavljeno-za-diskriminaciju-Srba/448710

BANJALUKA - Devet sudija Suda BiH i šest tužilaca Tužilaštva BiH prijavljeno je za diskriminaciju Srba u procesima za ratne zločine, a u informaciji Republičkog centra za istraživanje rata, ratnih zločina i traženje nestalih lica navedeno je da su oni i u ratu obavljali razne funkcije u vojnim sudovima.

U informaciji su navedene sudije Suda BiH - Davorin Jukić, Šaban Maksumić, Mirsad Strika, Mira Smajlović, Hilmo Vučinić, Radžib Bagić, Mirza Jusufović, Halil Lagumdžija i Džemila Begović, piše "Glas Srpske".

"Za pristrasnost i diskriminaciju Srba u procesima ratnih zločina prijavljeni su i tužioci Tužilaštva BiH - Dževad Muratbegović, Ibro Bulić, Remzija Smailagić, Seid Marušić, Miroslav Marković i Sena Uzunović", navedeno je u informaciji.

Većina imena sa liste prijavljenih i ranije je dovođena u vezu sa nečovječnim postupanjem u ratu i podrškom zločinima, o čemu su svjedočili srpski logoraši i zarobljenici.

Ova informacija naći će se danas pred članovima Visokog sudskog i tužilačkog savjeta.

Banjaluka, 25/10/ (Glas Srpske) Devet sudija Suda BiH i šest tužilaca Tužilaštva BiH prijavljeno je za diskriminaciju Srba u procesima za ratne zločine, a u informaciji Republičkog centra za istraživanje rata, ratnih zločina i traženje nestalih lica navedeno je da su oni i u ratu obavljali razne funkcije u vojnim sudovima. U informaciji su navedene sudije Suda BiH - Davorin Jukić, Šaban Maksumić, Mirsad Strika, Mira Smajlović, Hilmo Vučinić, Radžib Bagić, Mirza Jusufović, Halil Lagumdžija i Džemila Begović.
Za pristrasnost i diskriminaciju Srba u procesima ratnih zločina prijavljeni su i tužioci Tužilaštva BiH - Dževad Muratbegović, Ibro Bulić, Remzija Smailagić, Seid Marušić, Miroslav Marković i Sena Uzunović, navedeno je u informaciji/Nine judges of the Court of BiH and six prosecutors of the Prosecutor's Office BiH reported for the discrimination of Serbs in the war crime proceedings in the Information of the RS Center for Investigation of War, War Crimes and Search for Missing Persons (submitted to the High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council). The Information stated additionally that during the 1992-95 war, they performed various functions at the military courts. The Information includes the names of the following judges: Davorin Jukic, Saban Maksumic, Mirsad Strika, Mira Smajlovic, Hilmo Vucinic, Radzib Bagic, Mirza Jusufovic, Halil Lagumdzija and Dzemila Begovic.
In addition, the following prosecutors were reported for bias and discrimination against Serbs in the war crimes proceedings: Dzevad Muratbegovic, Ibro Bulic, Remzija Smailagic, Seid Marusic, Miroslav Markovic and Sena Uzunovic.
More on the RS Center for Investigation of War, War Crimes and Search for Missing Persons on: http://www.rcirz.org/

The information initially published at the site of the RS Center for investigation of War, War Crimes and Serach for Missing Persons https://www.rcirz.org/lat/informisanje/vijesti/item/621-vsts-sudije-i-tuzioci-i-u-ratu-necovjecno-postupali?fbclid=IwAR3QISUELyvlzBAPXDY-U1cvODDGo0LPdZYy9K1KLJUKoeJUZiII184a1aU (removed)

Zaključci VSTV-a BiH povodom „Informacije Centra za istraživanje rata i ratnih zločina i traženje nestalih lica Republike Srpske“ 26.10.2017.

 https://www.pravosudje.ba/vstv/faces/vijesti.jsp;jsessionid=ad8093956e5df6fc370f7e504ab0380e25d2eba7bf84766c126d2ffbcd5edbd9.e34TbxyRbNiRb40Pbx4LaxqObxr0

Zaključci VSTV-a BiH povodom „Informacije Centra za istraživanje rata i ratnih zločina i traženje nestalih lica Republike Srpske“

26.10.2017.

Tokom sjednice Visokog sudskog i tužilačkog vijeća Bosne i Hercegovine (VSTV BiH/Vijeće), koja se održava 25. i 26. oktobra 2017. godine, VSTV BiH je povodom 3. tačke Dnevnog reda sjednice pod nazivom „Informacija Centra za istraživanje rata i ratnih zločina i traženje nestalih lica Republike Srpske“, usvojilo sljedeće zaključke: 

1. Vijeće je usvojilo zaključak da se „Informacija Centra za istraživanje rata i ratnih zločina i traženje nestalih lica Republike Srpske“, zajedno sa prilozima, dostavi na nadležno postupanje Uredu disciplinskog tužioca VSTV-a BiH te od njega zahtjeva prioritetno postupanje po istoj.

2. Vijeće je usvojilo zaključak da se „Informacija Centra za istraživanje rata i ratnih zločina i traženje nestalih lica Republike Srpske“, zajedno sa prilozima, dostavi Tužilaštvu BiH na nadležno postupanje.

3. Vijeće je usvojilo zaključak da se od tužilaštava u BiH zatraže sljedeći podaci:

• da li se protiv bilo kojeg sudije ili tužioca navedenog u „Informaciji Centra za istraživanje rata i ratnih zločina i traženje nestalih lica Republike Srpske“ ili bilo kojeg          drugog sudije ili tužioca u BiH, vodi istraga, odnosno krivični postupak; 
• zatražiti podatke o licima optuženim za ratne zločine, njihovoj nacionalnosti i pravnim kvalifikacijama koje su im stavljene na teret, sa posebnim osvrtom na zločin protiv čovječnosti.

4. Vijeće je usvojilo zaključak da se od sudova u BiH koji su nadležni za postupanje u predmetima ratnih zločina zatraže podaci o nacionalnosti lica pravosnažno oslobođenih i osuđenih za ratne zločine, pravnoj kvalifikaciji za koje su osuđeni, te visinama kazne.

5. Vijeće je usvojilo zaključak: 

a) VSTV će zatražiti od Ministarstva pravde BiH, Savjeta ministara BiH i Parlamentarne skupštine BiH da, po hitnoj proceduri, izvrše dopunu člana 44. Zakona o VSTV-u BiH u smislu uvođenja izuzetne mogućnosti za razrješenje sudije ili tužioca bez provedenog disciplinskog postupka.

b) Stalna komisija za legislativu VSTV-a BiH, uz podršku Odjela za pravna pitanja VSTV-a BiH, će pripremiti sadržaj odredbe koji će biti dostavljen kao prijedlog Ministarstvu pravde BiH, Savjetu ministara BiH i Parlamentarnoj skupštini BiH, a koji će zadovoljiti sve neophodne pravne standarde i zahtjeve Evropske konvencije za zaštitu ljudskih prava.

-kraj-

INTERNATIONAL FORUM Dialogue of courts - a tool for the harmonisation of judicial practice (concept paper, agenda and participants) Sarajevo, June, 2016

Harmonisation of judicial practice is an emerging issue which importance is being recognised at different levels throughout Europe. The uneven application of national legal norms and standards of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) results in a lack of legal certainty and thus the unpredictability of the outcome of a dispute.

In separate countries, the problem was recognised as an obstacle to an efficient functioning of the judiciary (see, for example, Opinion on Legal Certainty and the Independence of the Judiciary in Bosnia and Herzegovina, CDL-AD(2012)014-e).

While the issue of incompatible legal norms within one legal order is clearly a seen as a problem which potentially leads to human rights violations, and numerous ECtHR judgments point out the necessity to bring legal acts in conformity with each other, and with the ECHR, little has been said as regards judicial practice.

The problem is even more sensitive since it involves the issue of judicial independence, when any attempt to “harmonise” the application of laws by a judge can be seen as an inappropriate interference with his or her actions.

Many countries use certain mechanisms in order to bring to coherence judicial practice at a national level. These vary from region to region; their form often depends on local legal traditions, and may include advisory opinions issued by high courts, distribution of case law through modern databases, special roles given to legal departments of higher courts. The effectiveness of those mechanisms also varies. The Council of Europe has contributed to the search for better models through its co-operation programmes. In the framework of projects implemented by the Human Rights National Implementation Division of the Directorate General of Human Rights and Rule of Law, working models have been suggested in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia. In 2016, it has become the topic of the Annual HELP Conference held in Strasbourg. Discussions have begun in Georgia and Ukraine. Interest in the topic was expressed by the judiciary of other countries.

Judicial dialogue is a key tool for the harmonisation of judicial practice. A dialogue between the ECtHR and national courts is ongoing through the application of European human rights standards in domestic trials. This will be reinforced once Protocol 16 to the ECHR enters into force, and a mechanism of advisory opinions will give this dialogue a new dimension. Similar dialogue between courts at a national level and between high courts of the countries of one region can contribute to a more coherent judicial practice. 

Objectives

The International Forum will aim to review practices of harmonisation of judicial practice applied in different countries, and to see how successful models can be emulated in different jurisdictions. The Forum will be a platform for sharing experience and best practices, searching for optimal models and looking for elements of harmonisation that can be equally applied in any jurisdiction.

The following key problems will be at the centre of the discussion:

1. National approaches on harmonisation of judicial practice: effective models and their applicability in different legal orders
2. Harmonisation of national judicial practice and the case law of the ECtHR: the role of dissemination and systematisation of data.
3. A special independent “harmonisation body” at a national level: a feasible model or utopia?
4. The Council of Europe’s contribution to the harmonisation of judicial practice.

In addition, the Forum will serve as a starting point for the creation of an informal network of co-operation between the highest judicial instances of the participating countries for the promotion of best practices with regard to the harmonisation of national practices with the case law of the ECtHR.

Participants

Participants of the Forum will be representatives of the judiciary from the Western Balkans, Ukraine, Georgia, representatives of the Secretariat of the Council of Europe and the Registry of the European Court of Human Rights.

Venue and language

The Forum will be organised by the Council of Europe in co-operation with the High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The working languages will be English and Bosnian/ Croatian/Montenegrin/Serbian with simultaneous interpretation provided.

Uputstvo za analizu stanja i izradu plana rješavanja starih i zaostalih predmeta u sudovima u BiH/ Instruction for Situation Analysis and Planning of Dealing with the Backlog of Cases at the Courts in BiH, VSTV/HJPC, Sarajevo, 2005

Memorandum o razumijevanju o softveru za upravljanje predmetima VSTV, USAID i Općinski sud Sarajevo/ Memorandum of Understanding on Case Management Software HJPC, USAID and Sarajevo Municipal Court

Memorandum o razumijevanju VSTV i USAID FILE + USAID JSDP/ Memorandum of Understanding HJPC and USAID FILE + USAID JSDP

Prvi godišnji izvještaj o radu VSTV (2004)/The first annual report of the HJPC (2004) (only local version)

Prvi godišnji izvještaj o radu VSTV (2004) navodi četiri glavna problema u pravosuđu, koji nisu riješeni ni danas 13 godina nakon ovog izvještaja. Ti problemi se odnose na: 1) zaostale neriješene predmete; 2) nedostatak sredstava za operativne troškove i nagomilana dugovanja; 3) neadekvatne zgrade sudova i tužilaštava i 4) nedostatak kvalifikovanih kandidata na mjesta u sudovima i tužilaštvima. Dokument sadrži i budžete sudova za 2003., 2004., kao i usvojeni budžet za 2005. Iz tog priloga je vidljiv nesrazmjer između dva entiteta - u 10 kantona troškovi sudova su u tom periodu bili između 63 i 65 miliona KM, dok je u Republici Srpskoj budžet za rad sudova iznosio od 21-25 miliona KM. VSTV je među članovima imao tri strana državljanina, i to tužitelja iz SAD, Michaela O'Malleya, suca iz Velike Britanije, Malcolma Simmonsa i norveškog advokata, Svena Mariusa Urkea. Izvještaj opisuje nekoliko projekata koje je inicirala i finansira međunarodna zajednica, uključujući i USAID-ov projekat uspostavljanja sistema za mjerenje efikasnosti u radu pravosuđa. / The First Annual Report of the High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council (2004) has listed four major problems in judiciary in BaH, which have not been solved by now, 13 years after this report. These problems are related to: 1) backlog of cases; 2) lack of finances for operational costs and debts; 3) inadequate buildings of courts and prosecutors' offices and 4) lack of qualified candidates for the positions of judges and prosecutors. The budgets of courts for 2003, 2004 and adopted budget for 2005 are attached to the Report. A disproportion between the spending for courts in two entities is evident - while 63 to 65 million BAM was required for the operation of courts in the Federation, the budgets in Republika Srpska varied from 21 to 25 million BAM for the same three-year period. The amount does not include budgets for two entity supreme courts, Brcko District courts and Court of BaH. The initial HJPC membership included three foreign professionals: a U.S. prosecutor Michael O'Malley, a judge from UK, Malcolm Simmons and a defense attorney from Norway, Sven Marius Urke. The Report describes several projects initiated and funded by international community, including the USAID funded establishment of system of measurement of effectiveness of judiciary.

Prvi članovi VSTV/ The initial HJPC members

Budžeti prvostepenih i drugostepenih sudova u FBiH i RS/ Budgets of the first- and second-instance courts in FBaH and RS

Prvi strateški plan Visokog sudskog i tužilačkog vijeća osnovanog 2004. (mart 2005 – decembar 2006.)/The First Strategic Plan of the High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council (HJPC) established in 2004 (March, 2005 - Dec. 2006) - only local version

U dokumentu se navodi  mogućnost nedostatku kandidata 'odgovarajuće' nacionalnosti, koja također predstavlja jedan od elemenata "podobnosti"za izbor. Također je jasno istaknut zahtjev da međunarodna zajednica pruži pomoć VSTV u realizaciji strateških ciljeva./ The document has emphasized a possibility of lack of candidates of "adequate" ethnicity, that is one of the elements of "eligibility" for election. It has clearly addressed the request to the international community to provide assistance to the High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council (HJPC) in accomplishment of strategic goals.  

Dokument, pored strateških pitanja, ciljeva i planiranih aktivnosti za realizaciju ciljeva, sadrži i kratak istorijat Visokog sudskog itužilačkog vijeća (VSTV). U samom dokumentu se navodi da je VSTV naslijedio mnogo funkcija i zadataka koji su obavljali IJC/VSTV-i i OHR/CIPRU, a na neki su način, IJC/VSTV-i obavili pripremni rad za izradu buduće strategije za sudove. OHR-ov odjel CIPRU obavio je sličan pripremni rad za tužilaštva. IJC/VSTV-i su bili uključeni u obavljanje niza funkcija i zadataka uključujući reorganizaciju sudova, provođenje procesa ponovnog imenovanja i uvođenje određenih reformi procesnih zakona. Tokom obavljanja ovih zadataka, identificirani su mnogi nedostaci i teškoće koji bili prisutni u sudovima i predložena su neka rješenja.
Za današnju situaciju u pravosuđu, posebno je zanimljivo kako je planirana realizacija aktivnosti 1.1. i 1.2., u smislu realizacije cilja da se privuku visoko stručni, dobro educirani pravnici visokih moralnih kvaliteta da rade kao sudije i tužioci u pravosuđu BiH, gdje se govori o privlačenju 'podobnih' kandidata, i o mogućem nedostatku kandidata 'odgovarajuće' nacionalnosti.
Aktivnost 1.1: Izraditi plan rješavanja ovog pitanja u kojem bi se obradile teme koje su relevantne za privlačenje podobnih kandidata i visokokvalificiranih pravnika u pravosuđe BiH kao i zadržavanje dobrih sudija i tužilaca na pravosudnim funkcijama (Upravljanje ljudskim resursima). Datum završetka: maj 2006. godine Odgovornost za ovu aktivnost ima: Vijeće uz pomoć Sekretarijata VSTV-a Komentar: Za ovu aktivnost bila bi od koristi pomoć međunarodne zajednice.
Aktivnost 1.2: Nastaviti s trenutnim procesom odabira s ciljem da se završi sa imenovanjem kandidata na preostala nepopunjena mjesta. Datum završetka: juni 2005. godine Odgovornost za ovu aktivnost ima: Vijeće uz pomoć Sekretarijata VSTV-a Komentar: Moguće je da zbog nedostatka kandidata “odgovarajuće” nacionalnosti neka mjesta neće biti popunjena u utvrđenom vremenskom roku.