The Commissioner for Information of Public Importance and Personal Data Protection adopted several complaints of the Judges’ Association (JAS) filed against the High Judicial Council (HJC)

News21.12.2011.

 The Commissioner for Information of Public Importance and Personal Data Protection adopted several complaints of the Judges’ Association (JAS) filed against the High Judicial Council (HJC) who failed to provide information of public importance related to the transparency, legality and legitimacy of the HJC proceedings in the review of reappointments.
Namely, HJC has only partially complied with the requests of JAS by providing 81 reasoned decisions (out of 337 passed) and explaining, partially and contradictory (in respect of the manner of voting of "old" HJC members), the manner of passing the decision in the review of the reappointments.
Finally, HJC has continued with its practice of failing to enforce the orders of a competent state authority, the Commissioner for Information of Public Importance and Personal Data Protection, inter alia, and forward:
- Reasoned decisions on all cases in which it reviewed the decisions of the HJC in its initial composition, with the exception of the decisions on 81 cases which it had forwarded, and
- Reasoned decisions of its Commissions, in the event it possessed them, and, in the event it did not, to state its views on them (Decision No. 07-00-02334/2011-03 of 29 November 2011)
- Minutes of all HJC sessions held within the reappointment review procedure (therefore, the minutes of the 1st session held on 20 July and continued on 22 July 2011, the 2nd session held on 16 August 2011, the 3rd session held on 26 August 2011, the 4th session held on 9 September 2011, the 5th session held on 23 September 2011, the 6th session held on 30 September 2011, the 7th session held on 6 October 2011 and other sessions held until it acts as requested)
- Full agenda of all those session
- Data on which members attended the sessions
- Data on the majority with which the decisions were rendered
- Data on whether the four HJC members who were members of the HJC in its initial composition took part in the voting
- Data on the reasons why the HJC rendered a decision at its session on 30 September 2011 that “Prof. Dr. Predrag Dimitrijevic, an elected member of the HJC, shall be relieved of the duty of deputy to the second member of Commission I Blagoje Jaksic, with the exception of the following cases in which he was rapporteur (12 cases were listed in the below text)”
- Data on the agenda of that session and which HJC members attended it, the majority with which the decision was taken and whether members of the HJC in its initial composition took part in the work and decision-making at that session, and the minutes of the session.
- Data on whether and when the HJC reviewed the motion HJC member Prof. Dr. Dimitrijevic submitted at the hearing on 3 October 2011 to be recused from participation in the case of Dragana Boljevic, the President of the Judges’ Association of Serbia, and
- A reasoned decision on the motion HJC member Prof. Dr. Dimitrijevic submitted at the hearing on 3 October 2011 to be recused from participation in the case of Dragana Boljevic, the President of the Judges’ Association of Serbia (Decision No. 07-00-22594/2011-03 of 30 November 2011)