MPs on dismissal of Court of Cassation president

BELGRADE Serbian MPs met on Thursday in Belgrade to debate the dismissal of Supreme Court of Cassation (VKS) President Nata Mesarovic. Opposition Democratic Party (DS) and Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) said they were against the proposal to dismiss Mesarovic. MPs on dismissal of Court of Cassation president The High Judicial Council (VSS) proposed to the Serbian parliament to dismiss her based on the Constitutional Court’s assessment that a regulation, based on which she was appointed, was unconstitutional. Representing the VSS, Justice Minister Nikola Selakovic addressed MPs and underscored that the judge's appointment had not been in line with the procedure established by the Constitution and Serbian laws. “It is up to the Serbian parliament to resolve this situation by delivering the decision on the end of the term, and creating conditions for carrying out the procedure for the election of a new president in accordance with the Constitution and laws,” the minister said. "The Constitution clearly establishes the procedure for the election of the president of the court of highest instance (VKS). Therefore, for an appointment to be valid, a candidate must to receive the approval of the VKS general session and that of the relevant parliamentary committee, while the election itself is conducted by the Serbian parliament." Selakovic added that regulations said nothing about what should be done when the holder of one of the three most important state offices has been appointed in the way that is contrary to the Constitution, and this is that legal situation. The question of the VSS legitimacy also arose, the minister said, stressing that only the VSS could propose that the parliament should deliver that decision, as that is the only possible and valid way in legal terms. He noted that on December 20, 2012, the Constitutional Court of Serbia (USS) delivered a decision, acknowledging that an article of the Law on Judges was not in line with the Constitution, and that the Constitution clearly defines the way in which the president of the court of highest instance should be appointed. He added that parliament was discussing the USS decision, which is not logical in legal terms, but it is the only legal way out from the existing situation. “It is up to the Serbian parliament to resolve this situation by delivering the decision on the end of the term, and creating conditions for carrying out the procedure for the election of a new president in accordance with the Constitution and laws,” Selakovic concluded. Opposition DS party MP Borislav Stefnaovic said during the debate that the decision to sack Mesarovic was "detrimental to our seriously ill judicial system". "You should have changed the law, and we would have supported you, instead of coming here and performing an execution of Nata Mesarovic," he said. Selakovic denied that the decision was "political", and rejected accusations coming from the opposition that "somebody was carrying out a personal war against her because she had the strength to send the killers of PM Zoran Djindjic to jail". Opposition LDP leader and MP Cedomir Jovanovic criticized the minister, saying that "everything he said in the explanation was incorrect": "The Constitutional Court of Serbia did not ask for this session to be held, it did not ask for Mesarovic to be dismissed. Either be a politician with character or let Oliver Antic sit there, because you are executing his orders. The elementary postulate of normal society is being completely negated here, and that is equality between legislative, executive and court authorities, and it is not there if the minister has no courage to say that he had launched the initiative." MPs from the ruling SNS party responded by saying that the Constitutional Court did not have to demand for its decisions to be carried out, and that the decisions of the highest court instance "must be respected by all". According to reports, the debate is unlikely to conclude on Thursday. (Beta) B92 Beta Tanjug

MPs on dismissal of Court of Cassation president

The High Judicial Council (VSS) proposed to the Serbian parliament to dismiss her based on the Constitutional Court’s assessment that a regulation, based on which she was appointed, was unconstitutional.

Representing the VSS, Justice Minister Nikola Selaković addressed MPs and underscored that the judge's appointment had not been in line with the procedure established by the Constitution and Serbian laws.

“It is up to the Serbian parliament to resolve this situation by delivering the decision on the end of the term, and creating conditions for carrying out the procedure for the election of a new president in accordance with the Constitution and laws,” the minister said.

"The Constitution clearly establishes the procedure for the election of the president of the court of highest instance (VKS). Therefore, for an appointment to be valid, a candidate must to receive the approval of the VKS general session and that of the relevant parliamentary committee, while the election itself is conducted by the Serbian parliament."

Selaković added that regulations said nothing about what should be done when the holder of one of the three most important state offices has been appointed in the way that is contrary to the Constitution, and this is that legal situation.

The question of the VSS legitimacy also arose, the minister said, stressing that only the VSS could propose that the parliament should deliver that decision, as that is the only possible and valid way in legal terms.

He noted that on December 20, 2012, the Constitutional Court of Serbia (USS) delivered a decision, acknowledging that an article of the Law on Judges was not in line with the Constitution, and that the Constitution clearly defines the way in which the president of the court of highest instance should be appointed.

He added that parliament was discussing the USS decision, which is not logical in legal terms, but it is the only legal way out from the existing situation.

“It is up to the Serbian parliament to resolve this situation by delivering the decision on the end of the term, and creating conditions for carrying out the procedure for the election of a new president in accordance with the Constitution and laws,” Selaković concluded.

Opposition DS party MP Borislav Stefnaović said during the debate that the decision to sack Mesarović was "detrimental to our seriously ill judicial system".

"You should have changed the law, and we would have supported you, instead of coming here and performing an execution of Nata Mesarović," he said.

Selaković denied that the decision was "political", and rejected accusations coming from the opposition that "somebody was carrying out a personal war against her because she had the strength to send the killers of PM Zoran Đinđić to jail".

Opposition LDP leader and MP Čedomir Jovanović criticized the minister, saying that "everything he said in the explanation was incorrect":

"The Constitutional Court of Serbia did not ask for this session to be held, it did not ask for Mesarović to be dismissed. Either be a politician with character or let Oliver Antić sit there, because you are executing his orders. The elementary postulate of normal society is being completely negated here, and that is equality between legislative, executive and court authorities, and it is not there if the minister has no courage to say that he had launched the initiative."

MPs from the ruling SNS party responded by saying that the Constitutional Court did not have to demand for its decisions to be carried out, and that the decisions of the highest court instance "must be respected by all".

According to reports, the debate is unlikely to conclude on Thursday.