The Constitutional Court must first decide on the constitutionality of the elections of its judges
(Published on 8 April 2014 at 14:03)
Podgorica (MINA) –Human Rights Action (HRA) believes that, due to urgent public interest, the Constitutional Court must decide on a number of submitted initiatives as soon as possible, primarily on the review of constitutionality of the election of its own judges.
HRA representative, Danilo Ajković, said that the Constitutional Court must decide on several initiatives as soon as possible, due to the urgent public interest, even if the judges have to work overtime to achieve that.
“It is essential that the Constitutional Court first decides on the constitutionality of the election of its own judges, i.e. on the proposal for the review of constitutionality of the Constitutional Law on Implementation of Amendments to the Constitution of Montenegro, filed by the Ombudsman. Depending on the outcome of that decision, the Court should also decide on other initiatives or proposals”, Ajković said to MINA news agency.
He also said that the Constitutional Court should decide on HRA’s initiative for review of constitutionality of the Rules of Procedure of the Parliament of Montenegro, which prescribes the third round of voting for the Supreme State Prosecutor, before the MPs vote.
According to him, urgency is also needed regarding the laws on financing political parties and election of MPs and councillors, in accordance with which the campaign for the upcoming local elections should be conducted.
“The Constitutional Court is the authority that now has to ensure the legality and legitimacy of these very important elections for the future of the Montenegrin judiciary and democratic institutions”, Ajković said.
He explained that the Constitutional Court deals with cases in order of their submission, but that the law provides that the court may decide on a case regardless of the order of submission if it judged to have a priority.
“The Constitutional Court may review a case as a priority – when it represents a significant legal issue and has a wider social significance, or when the requirements for the issuance of an interim order to suspend enforcement of an act have been fulfilled”, Ajković said.
Ajković stated that, HRA appealed to the Constitutional Court to publish the schedule of the decision-making process on submitted proposals in a letter addressed to the Court president in March 2013. HRA has submitted initiatives for review of constitutionality, as well as a plan for solving more than 1.5 thousand constitutional complaints that are pending.
“We have also appealed to the Court to publish the reasons for deciding on a case as a priority, but the Constitutional Court did not announce such an action plan”, said Ajković.
The Venice Commission is informed about the problem of election of the Supreme State Prosecutor in our country, as this institution told Antena M.
“The Venice Commission is informed about the problems associated with the election of the Supreme State Prosecutor of Montenegro. Given that the Constitutional Court deals with this issue, we are confident that the Court will make a decision in accordance with the Constitution and European standards”, said the Venice Commission spokeswoman Tatjana Michel for our radio.
We note that Human Rights Action submitted the initiative to review the constitutionality of the provision that prescribes the third round of voting for the election of the Supreme State Prosecutor. HRA reminded that this provision is contrary to the Constitution, which provides for two rounds of voting.
* * * * *
HRA press release on the submitted initiative to the Constitutional Court and the text of the initiative are available here.
