Voters, we made effort for nothing!

News Articles17.04.2010.

RECALL: On April 27th this year, a letter from the President of the European Commission, Mr. Jose Manuel Barroso, arrived to the addresses of Ms. Dragana Boljević, President of the Judges’ Association of Serbia, and Mr. Goran Ilić, President of the Prosecutors’ Association of Serbia. Right after the letter had been announced, which was last Thursday in “Vreme” magazine and on the press conference of the Judges’ and Prosecutors’ associations, Mr. Boško Ristić, who has many functions (attorney, deputy, head of the Committee for the Judiciary of the Serbian Parliament and a member of the High Court Council and the State Prosecutorial Council, by position), was a guest on the television evening news with national frequency. He clearly stated - “The letter does not exist”, and calling the president of the Judges’ Association, Dragana Boljević, the "former" president. By morning, things have changed a bit, and a letter was no longer non-existent, but Ristić said that it was a "private conversation" between Dragana Boljević (again, the former!) and President of the European Commission.
"A letter that was presented by the former president of the Judges’ Association of Serbia Dragana Boljević, is a private conversation between her, as a former president of the Judges’ Association of Serbia, and Mr. Barroso and that is a response to her question for the European Commission about the results of the visit in February," says Ristić.
Ristić claims - "The European Commission did not take any new stands about the process of judicial reform in Serbia", saying on last Friday that the EC considers that the election of judges was conducted according to European standards, and that their only remark is that specific information about the reasons for not electing some judges, must be provided for those non-elected judges (and prosecutors). "We expect full support for the reform process. If there were any flaws, the relevant institutions of Serbia will act upon that, especially the Constitutional Court of Serbia, which is also a credible institution. We expect that the court will finish the job without the pressure of that kind,” says Ristić.
On the same day, from the EC seat in Brussels, came the confirmation that Barroso’s letter is official, and that it includes specific remarks to the election of judges and prosecutors.
"I can confirm that President Barroso wrote a letter to the Judges’ Association of Serbia on 27th April about the appointment of judges and prosecutors in Serbia and that he wrote on behalf of the Commission, and not on his on behalf," said EC representative Mark Gray.
Before that letter for professional Judges’ and Prosecutors’ Association, letters from EC reached three addresses: of the President of Serbia Boris Tadić, Prime Minister Mirko Cvetković and the Minister of Justice Snežana Malović, but the content of those are not known; not a single statement about the content of letters was made by “ours”.
Instead of letting the public hear specific remarks of Europe about the conducted reform (in it’s “personal” section), instead of saying what is planned as a “necessary exit” from the fumbling of reelection of judges, the public is served with either the Zeus silence or lies: there is no letter, there is letter, if it exists, than it is private…. Only Dragana Boljević’s nose could be sky high: although non-elected, she has the privilege to correspond personally and privately with the head of the European Commission, which should be worrying for the authorities at least because of the fact that she is one of the most exposed in requesting the explanation for the non-elected judges and at criticism on lack of transparency and the confidentiality of the whole proceeding in institutions competent for the re-election.

CRITERIA FOR GOVERNMENT AND NON-GOVERNMENTAL: Not only did attorney Ristić, in the role of supreme arbiter of prosecutors and judges, shower false and contradictory claims on us, but he also continues to humiliate the President of the Judges’ Association Dragana Boljević. He keeps calling her "former president", even though the Association decided that not only would she remain president, but also the other non-elected judges would be considered members until the expected court decision solves their status. So far, no one of 1649 members of the Judges’ Association has opposed her position of the president. The exception is the president of High Court Council, Nata Mesarović (also a member of the Association), and Bosko Ristić, who has recently waved (at “The Impression of the Week” (Utisak nedelje), TV B92) some papers that prove she was not registered as the president of the Association in the “state books”, but, the only person authorized to represent judges still is Omer Hadžiomerović, who is now a judge of the Appellate Court in Belgrade, and former president of the Board of the Judges’ Association (after him, three judges-members did that job).
What is Dragana Boljević’s sin? In short: In 2003, it was decided to amend the Statute of Judges’ Association, to elect the President of the Organization instead of the President of the Board, and to change the working quorum, because - as all the major non-governmental organization know –it is very hard to provide half the membership each time something should be agreed upon.
At the lack of money, the Association had decided that the members should make written reply to proposed amendments of the Statute (only the most important are mentioned): 926 out of 1649 members voted (more than 50 percent), of which 773 were for amendments, 16 against, and 137 abstained. However, the Ministry of the Interior refused to register amendments to the Statute and the change of person authorized to represent. The Association appealed, and the whole story had an ending in the Supreme Court of Serbia in December 2008, who was of the same opinion as Ministry: The Association did not gather the Assembly - in the physical sense - and the fact that the absolute number of judges-members of the written reply to amendment of the Statute is not relevant.
All this happens at the time when we have a Law on electronic signature and when the Serbian Government makes valid decisions during conference calls…

While the rocks is being thrown on the President of the Judges’ Association-former, non-existed, illegal…- some facts about her biography should be mentioned, at least about the time when she was president of Association.
She was elected on 11 March 2006: thence she was a member of the Civil Section of the Judicial Centre (since June 2006); a training program "The ethics of judges" came out from that. From December 2006 to July 2007, she had been the president of the Working Group of Judicial Reform Commission (Ministry of Justice) for making Basic Principals of laws on judiciary. From June until December 2007 she was a member and then the president of Working Group of Judicial Reform Commission for making Basic Principals for laws on national institute for training in judiciary, then, from 2005 until 2007, she was the leader of project and co-author of the book The Evaluation of Judicial Performance, published in November 2007. We will not enumerate the rest (Dragana Boljević’s Biography is posted on the website of “Vreme”), we will only mention the reward of OSCE for the Person of the year 2007 for the rule of law.
Even apart from the fact she was not elected (as one among many) owing the counterfeit data on her results as a second-instance judge at former District Court, Civil Law Department, there is an inevitable question after all these information: how come she, as fake and non-authorized president of the Judges’ Association of Serbia, could have sat, better said - worked - in Working groups of the Ministry that prepared laws for this reform? Why the authorities of that time did not proclaim her unworthy as they did recently? And Boško Ristić and many others were competent at that time as well as today, from 2006-present. In addition, how come that they accepted her as a president of Judges’ Association earlier, and recently they oppose her qualities?

CONTINUOUS FLOW HEATER: It is hard to resist the impression that today is the same situation like at the time of Slobodan Milošević’s regime, which denied the Judges’ Association, and when twenty of them had been expelled from judges’ orders in the second half of the nineties (including some who were later returned and are indisputable and are always honor of the profession); again, political control of the judiciary is wanted, our politicians - Boško Ristić, the subject - again tell fairy tales about their good intentions. After all, the High Court Council is composed of judges and politicians: apart from the President Nata Mesarović, so far, we have not heard anyone to defend publicly the reelection of judges (and there are six of them). We have heard political figures, Ristić and the Minister of Justice, and a representative of the advocacy even now bears the burden of fact that he was not elected by the Assembly, but the Board of the Bar Association of Serbia. Any analogy to the Judges’ Association of Serbia is accidental, although Judges’ Association has the written statements regarding the change of the Statute, and the Bar Association was at the mercy of state in this matter.
Now, everything depends on the Constitutional Court of Serbia, just like Ristić, attorney and functionary, said. Two out of 15 judges are missing; The High Court Council and the State President will appoint them. All that happens after four new judges were elected, nominated by the Supreme Court and appointed by the High Court Council (one of them “failed”). It was done, at list in one case, on the principal of a “continuous flow heater”. Here is the explanation: 24 candidates were elected from the former judges’ order for the new Administrative Court, and 12 from new nominated judges that three years trial period referred to (they were elected by the Assembly, not High Court Council). Now, among those new candidates was Minister’s assistant of the Ministry of Administration and Local Self-Government, Đokić Bratislav. He was not a judge before that time; the only available information about him was that he was 73rd at the list of 120 candidates in total, that he studied 7 years and finished Law School with an average grade of 7,12.
The man could not completely move into his new-judicial office at the Administrative Court, and he already prospered to the Constitutional Court. Even though their drawers and wardrooms are formed and judicial administration (it have countless problems at reformed judiciary, by the way) which was leader at efficiency, but still the building in Nemanjina Street in Belgrade does not have the usage permission, not even for the elevators (and we are talking about the legal state!). That is, by the way, the court that we hope would provide justice; if not some on lower instance, than it will provide the Constitutional Court and then there is International Court for Human Rights at Strasbourg, to give us some justice.
Voters, we made effort for nothing!

LET’S GET A DIVORCE: It is still not agreed concerning the Constitutional Court (two candidates are missing, one who is to be nominated by the President of the Republic and the other by the Supreme Court; the date of the appointment is not known). Concerning the other judges, there is not an understanding yet: they don’t care about European Union and it’s bodies, as long as their correspondences are not public, and there is private writing to non-elected judge Dragana Boljević and the elected prosecutor Goran Ilić. After all, if we want the European way, we will have to apply some of the European standards; if we do not want European way, we should stay in our non-European house, we already have it.
At that place there are no clear criteria and no public biographies; for example, the biography of a new constitutional judge Đokić (unfortunately, it is not the only one). We are neither familiar with the difference between the biographies of elected and non-elected judges, nor we - the public, can get any idea how they plan to solve all the fuss, based on what we are served.
We know that if they remain so boldly strong, like Zeus, about justifications of their impeccability, there is no European way: Boško Ristić, Nata Mesarović and to many unknown, quiet judges, that everything is perfect. Europe will have no understanding for us. Exception is Dragana Boljević, who will still have private correspondence with the Head of the European Commission. Maybe her husband - attorney, would get mad at her because of that intimacy, and they get divorced, and then she would get qualified to go over that barrier in her biography and be re-elected - she would not be the only one, many had a formal divorce just to be able to fulfill those inconsistent criteria of the High Court Council.

Tatjana Tagirov