The annual report of the Disciplinary Prosecutor’s Office was the focus of the first day of the regular session of the High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council (HJPC) of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH). 840 complaints about the work of judicial institutions were recorded in the previous year. The long duration of procedures and mistakes in decision-making are the most common reasons for numerous complaints. The move of Branko Peric, judge of the Court of BiH, to attach a dissenting opinion to the verdict for the first time in the history of this court, was a reason for the Office to react and file a case against him. However, the HJPC has no comment, at least for now.
BiH is at the very top in Europe in terms of the number of reported and sanctioned judges and prosecutors. The annual report of the Disciplinary Prosecutor’s Office shows a large number of complaints due to the length of court proceedings and decisions. The last example in the series is the formation of a case against Branko Peric, a judge of the Court of BiH, due to a dissenting opinion at the sentencing of Fadil Novalic et al, due to the disputed procurement of Chinese respirators.
“I can confirm that a case has been formed. Based on the information, media captions, and various reports that we receive, the Office believes that it is necessary to register and record such a case as a complaint based on such information,” said chief disciplinary prosecutor Alena Kurspahic-Nadarevic.
Due to the proceedings in this case, which will still follow, the chief disciplinary prosecutor before the HJPC did not speak about the details, just as the president of the HJPC, Halil Lagumdzija, did not want to comment, because due to his position, he does not want to state his position publicly yet.
“Since the case is open and there may be disciplinary proceedings in the future, the Council would have to work through disciplinary commissions in that situation. For the sake of objectivity and for my possible future actions, I will keep my opinion and my position to myself,” Lagumdzija pointed out.
The chief disciplinary prosecutor stated, among other things, that 33 disciplinary measures were imposed. And two transfers from the position of the chief to the position of the prosecutor were recorded. However, after the devastating statistics, the Office says that among the sanctioned judges and prosecutors, there are also those who repeat mistakes. The HJPC sees the solution in education and discussion.
“To educate, to additionally point out to judges and prosecutors what is not allowed, what is inappropriate. Where there are disciplinary procedures and where it is determined that they cheated, to put it in layman’s terms, there will be disciplinary procedures,” concluded Lagumdzija.
The session’s agenda included work on the new Rules of Procedure of the HJPC with the proposal that information on the disciplinary procedure not be published until the procedure is completed. A set of changes to the Rules of Procedure will be considered at one of the following sessions.
E.Dz.
