REBELLION OF JUDGES

Judiciary and Morality

AIM Belgrade, 6 December, 1996

"I do not agree to dependent judiciary in which the court does laundry for daily politics instead of being a symbol of the legal state", wrote a few days ago in a statement for the public, Dr Zoran Ivosevic, judge of the Supreme Court of Serbia, and in this way marked the beginning of a rebellion of judges in Serbia against flagrant electoral fraud after the second round of the local elections. It is possible that this move of judge Ivosevic will mark a turning point in the protest of hundreds thousand embittered citizens who are for almost three weeks already in the streets of Belgrade, Nis, Novi Sad, Kragujevac, Jagodina, Pirot, Uzice... Having discovered that the coalition of the democratic opposition "Together", on 17 November, won the elections in about forty cities and towns in Serbia, after a couple of days of complete shock during which it officially recognized the victory in the biggest urban centres, the regime started with massive invalidation of the election results with the assistance of electoral commissions and courts.

Explanations were not only false but mostly also ridiculous, but this of course was no obstacle for the authorities to schedule the third round of the elections in which the coalition Socialist Party of Serbia-Yugoslav United Left-New Democracy came out as a winner everywhere except in Kragujevac and Novi Sad which were generously handed over to the opposition. Citizens came out into the streets shouting "theft", but the last who could be expected to admit that they were right were the judges. Dr Ivosevic, an experienced judge and an expert in jurisprudence - who immediately earned the nickname "Serbian Zola" - wrote also: "I do not agree to the role of a submissive subject given to the court, in which the elections are turned into self-nomination. I do not agree to obedience to daily politics and to a trial in which the political will of any party is humoured. I do not agree to election of judges who are loyal, but not competent. I do not agree to defend the state against democracy, because democracy should be defended against the state, if it is not up to it. I do not agree to be silent about disgrace of the judiciary, if I am forced as it is to be ashamed of the court because of decisions which do not do it credit".

On the same day as the letter of judge Ivosevic, Nasa Borba published the letter of another four respectable judges of the Supreme Court of Serbia (Milan Subic, Milovan Dedijer, Dr Zoran Ivosevic, Leposava Karamarkovic, M.A. and Radoslav Cosic) in which they say as follows: "The latest developments concerning the elections for municipal and city councillors in which many colleagues of ours participated as presidents and members of electoral commissions and members of tribunals for the evaluation of legality of decisions reached by electoral commissions, made the honour and dignity of our profession questionable, as well as the reputation of the judiciary in general... It is not at all easy for us and we feel very humiliated when we know that thousands of people are marching by the building of our court crying: thieves, thieves, throwing eggs and breaking the windows on their way. Knowledge is painful that people light candles in front of some court houses in Serbia accompanying shouting "justice is dead"... This letter was addressed to Nasa Borba and Politika, but of course, Politika did not publish it, just as not a single media controlled by the state mentioned the protest of judges in a single word.

The words of the judges of the Supreme Court, the highest instance in judicial hierarchy in Serbia, undoubtedly has the greatest weight, although it is only five out of several tens of judges, and although signatories were not involved in invalidation of election results (another sector of the Supreme Court was in charge of the job). Reactions of other jurists are also very important. As soon as the regime started to invalidate the elections, judge of the Constitutional Court of Serbia, Slobodan Vucetic, who is well known to the public as an unsparing critic of the authorities, immediately reacted and stressed that "to ruthless lawlessness and violation of fundamental constitutional freedoms and rights by the authorities", the citizens have a right to respond by incessant mass resistance and civic disobedience, including peaceful blockade of administrative agencies and vital social institutions, as well as to seek arbitration of international democratic institutions.

A day or two later, about fifty professors of the Law School in Belgrade - from assistant lecturers to retired professors - and other experts in law, sent a letter to associations of lawyers of Serbia and Yugoslavia demanding an expert discussion on legal action "in this case". If they refused, the mentioned associations would not be considered to be their professional organizations any more, and they would inform members of both associations on the reasons for this "everywhere and in all suitable ways". Finally, judges of courts of the lower instance also started to react. The Belgrade Palace of Justice, the seat of the First and the Second Municipal Court which were in charge of invalidation of the elections, according to all information, is in a state of emergency and one could say that the number of those who are taking one or the other side is increasing. A group of judges of the District Court issued a statement, and Miroslav Todorovic who is one of them, declared for Dnevni telegraf: "if we find out that there were abuses by the judges, or members of tribunals, we will publicly call them to account for it. We will not give anyone a pretext for abuses. If there were any, it will mean that they will be relieved of duty".

According to the latest information, a protest of eight judges of the Fifth Municipal Court in Belgrade was written and sent. It is especially significant that judges from the interior of the country have also started to call, because it was always necessary to have more courage for any type of protest there than in the capital. Almost the whole personnel of judges of the Municipal Court of Prokuplje - 11 judges - expressed support of the judges of the Supreme Court of Serbia who disassociated themselves from the judicial re-shaping of the election results. In the end of the letter which lacked only signatures of judges of the three-member tribunal which was in charge of decision-making concerning electoral appeals, the following is stated: "Obedience to daily politics and serving the purpose of political will of any party for the sake only of its interests inevitably leads to degradation of this profession. We are informing you that we are with you in the struggle for honour and dignity of the judicial profession, firmly convinced that we are not the only judges of the lower instance with such a conviction".

According to the latest information, judges from Nis, Pirot and Jagodina have also protested. The judges have never, neither under the previous nor the present regime raised their voices in this way, but - as Dr Jovan Buturovic, former judge of the Supreme Military Court, a lawyer now, stated for the weekly Vreme - there has never been such obvious, filthy, rough violation of rights. "Even in the former regime it was done with more grace", Buturovic noted, stating that this had provoked judges, and the entire public. The comment of Pavle Nikolic, Professor of the Law School in Belgrade and known expert for constitutional law, in the same weekly was: "It has started to dissolve".

Silent disassociation had started even before this public one: out of about eighty judges in Nis, the authorities could not find a single one who was ready to participate in invalidation of the elections, so they had to bring a judge from Bela Palanka. Nevertheless, as Buturovic noted, this was just evading responsibility to make a wrong decision, but still not courage to make the right one. It is quite possible that the gesture of judges of the Supreme Court of Serbia will make that step possible, because - although it is obvious that "in the heads of the jurists telephones still ring and tell them the interests of the ruling party" - judges in Serbia are not re-appointed any more, but appointed for life. Even the Acting President of the Supreme Court of Serbia, Balsa Govedarica, who gave a big interview to Vecernje novosti immediately after the open letter of his colleagues, said that "nothing will happen to them". It is true, though, that he added: "It is another question how their action will be assessed". Govedarica also said that "nobody was robbed by judicial decisions", and concerning protests of the coalition "Together" and their decision to boycott the third round of the elections, he uttered the following: "Imagine a judicial system in which parties would accept and respect only those decisions which suit them, and against those other decisions, they would organize public protests and attacks against the court. No such thing is possible in any democratic country".

In such an atmosphere, the coalition "Together" is trying to reach justice by legal means and not just demonstrations. Interesting things have started to happen. After a series of attempts of the jurists of this coalition, President of the City Electoral Commission of Belgrade, Radovan Lazarevic, suddenly decided to after all send the minutes of the City Electoral Commission to the coalition "Together". The Court was invalidating the elections in Belgrade mostly with the explanation that the City Electoral Commission had not at all considered complaints of the Socialist Party of Serbia (?!). From the minutes, however, it is quite clear that the City Electoral Commission had discussed these complaints in an orderly manner (which must have been clear to every jurist, and even laymen, from the very beginning). Having received this document, the coalition "Together" lodged an appeal for repetition of the proceedings which had already been conducted in which the third round of the elections was ordered. The evidence - the just mentioned minutes - was submitted with the appeal. The First Municipal Court, however, on 4 December, rejected the appeal with an incredible explanation - that "according to the assessment of the Court, this new evidence is not legally relevant"! Coalition "Together" immediately prepared a demand to the Supreme Court of Serbia for special re-examination of this verdict. It is expected that the demand will be handed in to the Supreme Court on 6 December and the deadline for its decision is 48 hours.

In the meantime something highly indicative has happened - the City Electoral Commission, which was until now the accessory in the electoral fraud, also lodged to the Supreme Court and Republican Public Prosecutor a demand for re-examination of all proceedings on invalidation of the second election round, with the explanation that "work, dignity and reputation" of the City Electoral Commission was questioned. According to the words of Gasa Knezevic, Professor of the Law School in Belgrade, and a legal advisor of the coalition "Together", "what happened to the Electoral Commission is offering a hand from one to the other side. The Supreme Court will now have two legal demands which go together - which is a completely new situation". It is possible, of course, that the City Electoral Commission reached the conclusion that the ship on board of which they were sailing until now was sinking, and that it was better to leave it while there was still time. It is also possible that this is a scenario made by the captain of the ship for finding any, even temporary, half-hour solution for a situation which is becoming quite unbearable for him.

In the midst of the massive protest which according to majority of evaluations is not primarily political, but simply moral, enormous responsibility lies with the judges of the Supreme Court of Serbia who will be making the decision.

(AIM) Roksanda Nincic