On October 4, 2023, in the conference hall of Hotel Panoramika, the twelfth session of Working Group 3, Judiciary and Fundamental Rights of the National Convention of the EU in the Republic of North Macedonia (NCEU-MK), was held, organized by the European Movement, on the topic “Selection and promotion within the judicial institutions –Through transparency and clarity to increased citizens trust in the Judiciary”. The session was attended by the members of the judicial council, representatives from the Ministry of Justice, representatives from the academy and civil society, judges, lawyers, jurists as well as other stakeholders.
The session was started by the national coordinator of NCEU-MK, Professor Mileva Gjurovska, pointing out that at the moment the Convention is focused on issues from the First Cluster – “Fundamentals” in order to create recommendations through dialogue that will be a contribution to the reform processes, while also affirming accession negotiations for membership in the Union.
She emphasized that transparency is also important for the acquisition of legitimacy of judges and prosecutors, and it directly results from the trust of citizens who form their opinions according to court decisions and court procedures.
The Deputy Minister of Justice, Viktorija Avramovska Madić stressed at the session that transparency is the basic characteristic of modern democracies and that it is especially important in judicial institutions, as it promotes efficiency, responsibility, and affords greater legal protection in an active fight against corruption. She recalled that a few months ago, the EC emphasized in its closing remarks at the bilateral screening that the country had undertaken all the necessary reforms and welcomed the adoption of all legal solutions that are in line with international standards, but that attention must be paid to the future period of their implementation.
– In order to talk about a completely independent and impartial justice system, two imperatives need to be met – the correct application of the laws and the correct application of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. On the other hand, transparency leads to increased efficiency and promotes trust in the justice system. It is in this direction that we must deliver visible results in order to facilitate the access to justice for citizens in the justice system, she said.
Olja Ristova, judge in the Basic Criminal Court and expert at NCEU-MK, pointed out that the transparency of the judicial bodies is always a vital part of the reform process, because the high level of transparency in countries with a developed justice system gives big results.
-It is expected that greater transparency will increase the trust of the citizens, and so, the more the public is informed, and the fewer decisions are made “behind closed doors”, the trust of the public should increase proportionally. The public can see how the council works in sessions and how them members of the judicial council think about making a specific decision, what arguments they give in support of their decision to vote for or against a proposal, Ristova believes. According to her, great transparency does not always mean that there is quality and professional work. For the latter, the criteria for an independent and professional composition of the judicial council should be met, a judicial
council whose members have integrity and are not influenced by any external influences, Ristova said.
Christoph Harsdorf, former judge and prosecutor, German and EU legal expert, spoke about his experience in sharing legal advice when he was sent to several countries around the world.
The selection and promotion of judges is a very critical point, as we have cases where the judiciary has degenerated in some countries, and judges rule in favor of political parties, so maintaining the integrity of the legal sector is a very difficult task, he said.
Speaking about the selection of judges in Germany, he said that a student needs to obtain a master’s degree in law from a recognized university, and after the master’s degree in law, he has the option of being trained as a judge for three years.
-Only a small part of the students decide to go in that direction. After these three years, there is a state exam, which lasts 12 days, conducted by the Ministry of Justice, and in that exam there are no restrictions on what questions will be asked. This is an outstanding example of system integrity. The prime minister’s daughter once failed this exam, and it was taken as a very good example that the system rejects those who are weak candidates, Harsdorf emphasized. Regarding our judiciary, he said that we are good in practice, that is, we have a good legal framework.
Nikola Tupanchevski, former Minister of Justice, professor at the Faculty of Law at UKIM and expert at NCEU-MK, said that what worries him is the timeframe of the Justice Development Strategy for 2023- 2027.
It is a serious document in which the margins that should be drawn about which direction we should move in the future when it comes to the justice sector. For some things, we are still not aligned as a society and as a country. An urgent step will have to be taken to adopt the strategy, that is why it should be in 2024, because the meaning is lost since in 2023 it will not be a strategy, but an analysis of the justice sector, Tupanchevski pointed out.
Fatime Fetai, public prosecutor at the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office – Skopje, said that the common goal is the European future, but this implies consistency in building a society based on European values, primarily on the rule of law, as required by the first Cluster – Fundamentals.
There is still an absence of even minimal trust in the judiciary by the citizens. What we lack are not more specific rules, not new laws, but we need lawyers who have the ability to apply the legal framework, the spirit of the law and the social values that the law protects, Fetai said. She estimated that all previous options with which the system was patched have already been used.
Ana Pavlovska Daneva, professor at the “Iustinianus Primus” Faculty of Law at UKIM, said that the 2017-2022 Strategy actually begins with reforms in the Judicial Council and that the Judicial Council was apostrophized at that time in 2017, as a cancer of the judiciary, and one of the biggest obstacles for judicial reform.
Regarding the remarks and significant views and guidelines in the strategy, the Law on Judicial Council was first amended, and then a new Law on Judicial Council was adopted which received all positive evaluations from both the international community and domestic experts, but if we look at the situation we will see that absolutely nothing has changed in terms of the effects and results that this law did not achieve, assessed Daneva.
The reasoning of the decisions of the Judicial Council, she added, is closely related to the transparency of their work, but we cannot see any. So, there is no need to change the law for this. The law should only be respected and the judges should pronounce what guided them to decide in a certain way to pass judgment, to announce it publicly and
make the reasoning available to the country. A majority of eight for voting is also provided for in the law, and we see that decisions are made without that majority, which means that the interpretation and implementation of the legal provision is wrong. It is not that the law itself has flaws and that it should change in that sense, but that it is used in a bad and politicized way, she said.
Darko Avramovski, director of the Coalition “All for a fair trial”, said that the key thing we should keep in mind is transparency, which does not mean only the public. Transparency implies that civil control can be carried out. Because all institutions are ultimately subordinate to the citizens. All institutions and state bodies work in the interest and at the expense of the citizens of the state.
From there, he says, citizens must have the right to be familiar with how these institutions and authorities implement the law, how they take care of protection for their rights and freedoms, and how they made the decisions they made, said Avramovski.
The Ambassador, President of the Council of Ambassadors, Muhamed Halili, in the role of co-chairman, pointed out the importance of the presence of representatives from high institutions at this session, because it is good for them to have the opportunity to hear the recommendations of the civil sector, as well as to present their opinion in the discussion section. Halili added that at the moment the state has high ambitions, but it also faces high contradictions, because the government representatives want their relatives to be future judges and prosecutors, while at the same time they are advocating for a better choice when hiring in the legal sector. Here he raised the question whether the judges are victims of politicians, or whether the politicians are victims of judges.
Among the recommendations that emerged from the session is to consider the possibility of revising the provisions by which the President of Macedonia proposes two members of the Judicial Council, who are then elected by the Assembly. Furthermore, the condition “prominent lawyer” for the selection of the members of the Judicial Council and the Council of Public Prosecutors on a proposal by the Assembly of Macedonia should be legally specified and contain criteria for the length of work experience, the matter with which they professionally dealt … These members who will meet the stated conditions should not already be judges, among other things, it is stated in the recommendations of NCEU-MK.