On the occasion of the public hearing on the Draft Amendments to the Law on the Public Prosecutor’s Office, the Association of Public Prosecutors of Serbia points out several issues of essential importance.
The proposed amendments to the Law on the Public Prosecutor’s Office, although in one part they contain the recommendations of the Venice Commission from the urgent follow-up opinion on the Draft Law on the Judicial Academy, in another part they do not contain them. Namely, the clarification of the High Prosecutorial Council’s discretionary powers when selecting candidates who have successfully completed prior training at the Judicial Academy has been completely omitted, although the state has committed to regulating this issue precisely through amendments to the Law on the Public Prosecutor’s Office.
We also point out that the provision on increasing the basic salary in case of unfilled public prosecutor positions was included in the Draft Law only after the High Prosecutorial Council had already expressed its opinion on the previously submitted text, which left the Council without the opportunity to express its opinion on this solution. Particular concern is the fact that the possible withdrawal of this provision is being discussed outside the Council, although a discussion on this issue was foreseen in the agenda of a session of the High Prosecutorial Council, which was not held due to the lack of a quorum. The High Prosecutorial Council is the most important institutional forum for discussing issues which directly affect the position and work of public prosecutors. At the same time, the purpose of this provision, which was adopted at the insistence of the Association’s representatives in the working group for drafting the law, is not primarily financial. Its goal is to encourage the High Prosecutorial Council to fill public prosecutor positions in a timely manner and thus ensure the efficient functioning of public prosecutors’ offices.
Finally, the process of amending the law was not transparent enough from the beginning, and the proposed amendments do not cover some of the key issues that this law should regulate. Organizing a public hearing in August, when a large part of the professional community is on annual leave, further reduces the visibility of the entire process, makes it difficult for the professional community to participate, and does not contribute to the transparency of the process.
Under such circumstances, the Association will not participate in the public hearing, because we do not want our formal presence to create the appearance of a professional dialogue for which the necessary conditions have not been provided.
Prosecutors Association of Serbia