DistantNews
Venice Commission Confirms Flaws in Serbian Judicial Laws; Ex-Prosecutor Demands Annulment

Venice Commission Confirms Flaws in Serbian Judicial Laws; Ex-Prosecutor Demands Annulment

From N1 Serbia · (9m ago) Serbian Critical tone

Translated from Serbian, summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.

TLDR

  • A former prosecutor, Jasmina Paunović, urges Serbian authorities to pass a law annulling controversial judicial laws proposed by Uglješa Mrdić.
  • Paunović stated that the Venice Commission's recommendations confirm criticisms previously raised by Serbian legal experts regarding these laws.
  • She emphasized that the annulled laws, which allegedly undermine judicial independence and the constitution, should have no legal consequences.

The Venice Commission's latest opinion on Serbia's judicial laws has validated the concerns long voiced by domestic legal experts and critics of the ruling Serbian Progressive Party (SNS). Former prosecutor Jasmina Paunović highlighted that the commission's recommendations, particularly concerning the five amendments adopted in January, directly address the issues previously raised about these so-called "Mrdić laws."

The regime tried to enslave the judicial branch, and the Venice Commission, with recommendations categorized into nine points, has ordered the restoration of prosecutorial independence and judicial autonomy.

— Jasmina PaunovićExplaining the Venice Commission's findings on the controversial judicial laws.

Paunović stressed that these laws, named after SNS MP Uglješa Mrdić, not only deviate from the constitution and existing legislation but also attempt to subjugate the judiciary. The Venice Commission's explicit directives, detailed in nine points, call for the restoration of prosecutorial autonomy and judicial independence, directly challenging the government's actions.

It is a disgrace for the Serbian authorities to allow foreigners to point out what the (domestic) professional public had already pointed out in time.

— Jasmina PaunovićCriticizing the government for ignoring domestic expertise.

From the perspective of N1 Serbia, this is a critical moment. The government's haste in passing these laws, bypassing transparency and expert debate as noted by the Venice Commission, is a disservice to the rule of law. It is particularly galling that foreign bodies must point out flaws that were evident to Serbian professionals all along. The call for a new law to nullify the previous ones, and to retroactively invalidate any legal consequences stemming from them, is a necessary step towards rectifying this grave error and restoring faith in Serbia's legal system.

If the laws themselves are null and void, then the legal consequences must also be considered null and void. All legal consequences should be considered as if they never occurred, because they are the result of shameful legal regulations.

— Jasmina PaunovićOn the implications of annulling the controversial laws.
DistantNews Editorial

Originally published by N1 Serbia in Serbian. Translated, summarized, and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.