Reizbor sudija 2009: uspeo početak reforme ili reforma neuspelog početka?
Re-election of Judges in 2009: Successful Beginning of the Reform or Reform of Unsuccessful Beginning?

Summary/Abstract: In order to assess the completed process of the general election of judges (elected from the existing pool of judges), equally praised by the government and other directly involved actors (above all the High Judicial Council) and criticised by the experts, the general election should be examined by posing three questions. Without analysing effective legal framework concerning the judicial reform, a negative view of the reform, upheld predominantly in the form of demands is expressed in regard to all three aforementioned questions: whether the election of judges was performed in accordance with the legal order as to have as the next step the legal rectification of this situation; whether the best candidates were elected - otherwise the election is not legitimate since the reform is justified only if it improves the unsatisfactory opinion of the judiciary; whether the election of judges was performed without the political influence, since politicians, as anywhere else, are also in proximity to the election of judges, bearing in mind that in an immature democracy the non-respect of the legal framework in the election of judges and election of those who do not deserve it and non-election of best candidates additionally diminishes the trust of citizens in the judiciary (which already does not enjoy a good reputation).

• Details
• Contents