KONSTITUCIONALIZOVANЈE PRAVOSUDNOG SAVETA U SEVERNOJ MAKEDONIJI I SRBIJI – MOŽEMO LI UČITI JEDNI OD DRUGIH?

Ključne reči: sudija, nezavisnost sudstva, pravosudni savet, ustav, Venecijanska komisija.

Apstrakt

Severna Makedonija i Srbija, približno u isto vreme, konstitucionalizovale su pravosudne savete. Sagledano iz perspektive evropskog modela pravosudnog saveta, Severna Makedonija se više približila tom uzornom modelu, dok je Srbija predvidela ustavna rešenja koja nisu eliminisala kanale za politički uticaj na pravosuđe. Otuda, odmah posle donošenja Ustava 2006. godine, bilo je jasno da će Srbija morati da promeni svoj ustav u delu o pravosuđu ukoliko svoju budućnost želi da veže za evropske integracione procese. Premda se taj proces nije odvijao brzo i jednostavno, ustavni amandmani koji konstituišu unapređeni model Visokog saveta sudstva usvojeni su 2022. godine. Međutim, ono što je karakteristično za ustavno modeliranje novog Visokog saveta sudstva, jeste činjenica da je promenu Ustava u delu o pravosuđu Srbija zasnovala isključivo na apstraktnoj kritici ustavnih rešenja iz 2006. godine i na preporukama Venecijanske komisije da je neophodno dosledno koncipirati evropski model sudskog saveta. Bez obzira na to što se Ustav primenjivao približno petnaest godina, nije bilo analize koja bi trebala da utvrdi ocenu rada Visokog saveta sudstva. Da je rad tog tela, kojim slučajem, ocenjen negativno, onda je trebalo da sledeći korak bude identifikovanje razloga za taj neuspeh. Osim toga, budući da je Severna Makedonija takođe imala već značajno iskustvo sa sudskim savetom koji je bio više usaglašen sa evropskim standardima, rezultati koje je to telo ostvarilo u praksi mogli su da budu korisni. Dakle, bez obzira na već značajno iskustvo tih dveju država, ali i iskustvo drugih država postsocijalizma, ustavna reforma pravosuđa u Srbiji sprovedena je bez ozbiljnije empirijske analize, već isključivo na osnovu apstraktne ideje da je evropski model sudskog saveta optimalno rešenje i da ga treba nekritički preuzeti.

Reference

Akimovska Maletić, I. 2017. Constitutional Changes in Macedonia: More than Two Decades. NBP. Nauka, bezbednost, policija, 22(3), pp. 47-66. https://doi.org/10.5937/nabepo22-15508

Bell, J. 2006. Judiciaries within Europe: A Comparative Review. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Bobek, M. & Kosař, D. 2014. Global Solutions, Local Damages: A Critical Study in Judicial Councils in Central and Eastern Europe. German Law Journal, 15(7), pp. 1257-1292. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2071832200019362

Castillo-Ortiz, P.J. 2017. Councils of the Judiciary and Judges’ Perceptions of Respect to Their Independence in Europe. The Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 9, pp. 315-336. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40803-017-0061-2

Kosař, D. & Vineze, A. 2022. European Standards of Judicial Governance: From Soft Law Standards to Hard Law. Journal für Rechtspolitik, 30(4), pp. 491-501, https://doi.org/10.33196/jrp202204049101

Kosař, D. 2018. Beyond Judicial Councils: Forms, Rationales and Impact of Judicial Self-Governance in Europe. German Law Journal, 19(7), pp. 1567-1612, https://doi.org/10.1017/S2071832200023178

Orlović, S. & Rajić, N. 2023. Changes in the Constitutional Position of the Public Prosecutor’s office in the constitutional revision 2022. Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta, Novi Sad, 57(1), pp. 137-160, https://doi:10.5937/zrpfns57-43269

Preshova, D., Damjanovski, I. & Nechev, Z. 2017. The Effectiveness of the “European Model” of Judicial Independence in the Western Balkans: Judicial Councils as a Solution or a New Cause of Concern for Judicial Reforms. CLEER Papers (1).

Simović, D. 2022. Constitutional Amendments Resulting from Necessity: A Critical Overview of the Constitutional Reforms of the Judiciary. Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta, Novi Sad, 56(1), pp. 85-119, https://doi:10.5937/zrpfns56-37949

Simović, D. & Petrov, V. 2018. Ustavno pravo. Beograd: Kriminalističko-policijski univerzitet.

Simović, D. 2016. The Constitutional Court of Serbia: A Controller or an Apologist? In: Lazić, M. & Knežević, S. (eds.), Legal, Social and Political Control in National, International and EU Law. Niš: Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Nišu, pp. 51-64.

Voermans, W. & Albers, P. 2003. Councils for the Judiciary in EU Countries. Leiden/The Hague.

Legal Sources

Venice Commission, CDL-AD(2005)038, Opinion on Draft Constitutional Amendments concerning the Reform of the Judicial System in “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”.

Venice Commission, CDL-AD(2010)004, Report on the Independence of the Judicial System Part I: The Independence of Judges.

Venice Commission, CDL-AD(2014)026, Opinion on the seven amendments to the Constitution of “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” concerning, in particular, the judicial Council, the competence of the Constitutional Court and special financial zones.

Venice Commission, CDL-AD(2015)042, Opinion on the Laws on the Disciplinary Liability and Evaluation of Judges of “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”.

Venice Commission, CDL-AD(2017)033, Opinion on the Draft Law on the termination of the validity of the Law on the Council for establishment of facts and initiation of proceedings for determination of accountability for judges, on the Draft Law amending the Law on the Judicial Council, and on the Draft Law amending the

Law on Witness protection.

Venice Commission, CDL-AD(2018)022, Opinion on the Laws amending the Law on the Judicial Council and the Law on Courts of “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”.

Venice Commission, CDL-AD(2018)033, Opinion on the draft amendments to the Law on Courts of “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”.

Venice Commission, CDL-AD(2019)008, Opinion on the Draft Law on the Judicial Council.

Objavljeno
2024-02-24
Sekcija
Pregledni naučni rad