VZCZCXRO9727
RR RUEHAG RUEHAST RUEHDA RUEHDF RUEHFL RUEHIK RUEHKW RUEHLA RUEHLN
RUEHLZ RUEHNP RUEHPOD RUEHROV RUEHSK RUEHSR RUEHVK RUEHYG
DE RUEHBW #1250/01 3401526
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 051526Z DEC 08
FM AMEMBASSY BELGRADE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 0706
INFO RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE
RHEHNS/NSC WASHDC
RUZEJAA/JAC MOLESWORTH RAF MOLESWORTH UK
RHMFISS/HQ USEUCOM VAIHINGEN GE

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 BELGRADE 001250 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PGOV PREL SR
SUBJECT: SERBIAN PARLIAMENT CONSIDERS JUDICIAL REFORM AMID 
CONTROVERSY OVER JUDGE REELECTION 
 
Summary 
------- 
 
¶1. (SBU) The Serbian Parliament is developing a package of 
legislation designed to strengthen the judiciary and improve its 
efficiency.  Some observers, especially the Judges Association of 
Serbia, have criticized the bills for requiring the selection of new 
judges for all courts, warning this could politicize the judiciary, 
and for abolishing some local courts, which they believe would make 
access to justice much harder for some citizens.  End Summary. 
 
Judicial Reform Bills in Parliament 
----------------------------------- 
 
¶2. (U) Parliament began on November 12 debate on a package of five 
bills to implement changes required by the 2006 Constitution, the 
Law on the Constitution, and the 2006 Judicial Reform Strategy 
(JRS).  The package of legislation includes a draft Law on Judges, a 
Law on Organization of the Courts, and the Public Prosecution Act, 
which describe the organization and function of the judiciary and 
prosecution.  The laws would replace the current Municipal and 
District Courts with Basic and Higher Courts and create the Supreme 
Appellate Court (Court of Cassation in civil law) to replace the 
current Supreme Court.  The laws would transfer many types of cases 
to other types of courts, including the Administrative and Appeals 
Court, which were created by law in 2001 but never implemented.  In 
addition, the Law on the High Judicial Council (HJC) would establish 
a new HJC to replace the existing one, and the Law on the State 
Prosecutors' Council would establish a similar council for public 
prosecutors.  The councils would be responsible for drafting 
criteria for selection, discipline, and dismissal of judges and 
prosecutors, and for the first time, the High Judicial Council 
rather than the Justice Ministry would be given responsibility for 
management and oversight of most day-to-day aspects of the 
judiciary. 
 
¶3. (U) In addition, the government plans to rationalize the 
distribution of courts by creating a new network of courts that 
would reduce the number of Municipal (soon to be Basic) Courts, 
consolidate others, and cut the number of judges from 2,500 to 
2,000.  The most controversial provisions of the bills require the 
new HJC to select new judges for all of the newly organized courts 
according to criteria it would establish.  Applicants for these 
judgeships would not be limited to sitting judges, and current 
judges could also apply for other judicial openings.  The Justice 
Ministry has promised to send the HJC's draft selection criteria to 
the Council of Europe for evaluation before the process begins. 
 
Judicial Reform Long Awaited 
---------------------------- 
 
¶4. (SBU) The need for judicial reform in Serbia has been long 
recognized, after decades of political interference during the 
socialist era and the Milosevic regime.  The European Commission has 
repeatedly stressed the need for greater judicial independence, 
efficiency, and transparency before Serbia's eventual accession to 
the European Union.  At the public unveiling of the bills on October 
29, President Tadic said judicial reform was necessary to increase 
judicial independence and improve citizens' confidence in the 
judiciary's ability to protect their rights and combat corruption. 
Justice Minister Snezana Malovic told us privately that the new 
network of courts would increase efficiency and that the selection 
of new judges would improve the overall quality of judges.  War 
Crimes Court President Sinisa Vazic told us reform was needed to 
address a serious workload imbalance: some judges in outlying courts 
heard only two or three cases per year while others, particularly 
those in Belgrade, had dozens of cases.  Justice Ministry State 
Secretary Slobodan Homen told us on December 2 that the Ministry's 
goal for the reforms was to bring Serbia's court system up to EU 
standards.  He encouraged review of the legislation and asked that 
he be told of any provisions which were not EU-compliant. 
 
Possible Flaws in Reform Plan 
----------------------------- 
 
¶5. (SBU) While the need for further reforms of the system is not 
disputed, some observers have expressed concerns about the 
government's proposals.  The most controversial aspect of the reform 
plan is the selection of judges for the newly organized courts.  The 
Judges Association of Serbia (JAS), a voluntary organization to 
which more than half of all Serbia's judges belong, reacted 
strongly, stating this provision constituted reelection of sitting 
judges, whereas the Constitution confers life tenure on judges, who 
can only be dismissed for misconduct.  The JAS cautioned that the 
status of judges left without positions because their courts were 
eliminated could only be settled by a Constitutional Court ruling. 
JAS is further concerned that the draft legislation gives the new, 
Parliament-appointed HJC sole responsibility for conducting the 
 
BELGRADE 00001250  002 OF 002 
 
 
entire selection process, which the JAS sees as an opening for 
pervasive political influence on all judges.  The JAS also said it 
did not get to see final drafts of the laws and contended there was 
no proper public discussion.  Based on a letter from JAS, the 
Consultative Council of European Judges issued a declaration 
November 14 expressing concern that the reelection of judges "may 
infringe judicial independence."  The Justice Ministry stated that 
the process was not a "reelection" because the entire court network 
would be new and judges would be applying for new jobs, not their 
own. 
 
¶6. (SBU) Even if the selection process is constitutional, observers 
have strong concerns that the process would be difficult and 
time-consuming and could even suspend the ordinary work of the 
judiciary.  Supreme Court President Vida Petrovic Skero, who also 
chairs the existing HJC, told us she anticipated a total of 10,000 
applications for the 2,000 judicial positions.  She said she worried 
about the capacity of the new HJC to complete the selection process 
within one year, since the existing HJC had no staff, resources, or 
selection procedures that could be transferred.  Director of OSCE 
Belgrade's Rule of Law and Human Rights Department Ruth Van Rhijn 
expressed skepticism that candidates for positions could be reviewed 
thoroughly in the 90 days after the appointment of the HJC, as 
currently required by the bill.  She said the government's 
confidence that it could enact its plan so quickly gave the 
appearance that the choice of judges was "precooked." 
 
¶7. (SBU) There are also concerns about the plan to eliminate some 
courts.  Vazic said some citizens would have to travel far to 
conduct routine tasks such as obtaining birth certificates, permits, 
and licenses.  Chief Public Prosecutor Isuf Sulejmani from Presevo 
in southern Serbia told us he worried that if the municipality's 
court closed, ethnic Albanians would have to attend the court in 
predominantly Serb Vranje, where their cases might not be given fair 
treatment.  Belgrade First Municipal Court President Miodrag Majic 
told us it would be difficult if not impossible to manage the new, 
consolidated courts efficiently or to oversee the work of all the 
judges appropriately.  Malovic told us the Ministry was concerned 
about access for minorities and had taken this into account in its 
plan for court reorganization.  The Justice Ministry announced that 
it received 300 suggested amendments to the bills and had accepted 
more than 90 of them, which have not been made public. 
 
Comment 
------- 
 
¶8. (SBU) Decades of political interference and inefficiencies in 
Serbia's judicial system have compromised judicial independence and 
citizens' confidence in the government.  Post has provided a wide 
range of support to help strengthen the judiciary and participated 
in some of the expert debates on the judicial reform package. 
Nevertheless, we are concerned that the judge selection exercise 
could aggravate existing inefficiencies during the selection 
process, since judges who thought they had life-time tenure would 
need to spend time applying for the "new" positions and might also 
be distracted by efforts to challenge the laws in the Constitutional 
Court, rather than focusing on their case loads.  End Comment 
 
BRUSH