
RESOLVING THE TERMINATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL COURT JUDGES’ FUNCTIONS: A CALL FOR URGENT AND LASTING SOLUTIONS
22/12/2024
MERRY CHRISTMAS AND HAPPY 2025!
31/12/2024EVALUATING THE PROSECUTORIAL COUNCIL’S PERFORMANCE IN 2023 AND 2024: ACHIEVEMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT

The fourth report from Human Rights Action (HRA) on the performance of the Prosecutorial Council underscores significant progress, particularly when compared to the findings presented in the 2022 report. Notable improvements have been observed in the reasoning provided for the decisions made by the Council.
In the current year alone, the Prosecutorial Council made 42 decisions concerning appointments and promotions, all accompanied by detailed explanations. The number of active prosecutors has risen from 85 at the end of last year to 114 by year-end, with an additional four state prosecutors anticipated to join in early 2025 after completing their training.
“It indicates that by the end of next year, we will approach the number of state prosecutors envisioned for operation within state prosecution”, remarked Chief State Prosecutor Milorad Marković during the report’s presentation. He emphasized that the necessary number of prosecutors to meet the demands is 141.
However, the analysis also noted a troubling trend of personnel leaving the profession. Over the past three years, approximately a quarter of state prosecutors have resigned. “The so-called official allowance, which provides a full salary for one or two years (one year plus an additional year if the beneficiary becomes eligible for a pension during that time) after resignation, creates an unfair incentive for prosecutors to depart from their demanding and socially responsible roles,” stated Gorjanc-Prelević from HRA.
Despite this challenge, there remains a sense of optimism as young legal professionals express interest in joining the prosecutorial service, with 24 applicants vying for 11 positions in the most recent recruitment round.
Marković emphasized that quality continues to be the primary selection criterion. “All decisions reflect this commitment, and it will remain the fundamental principle guiding future public announcements, promotions, and the appointments of heads of state prosecution offices”, he added.
Another challenge highlighted in the report was the lack of adequate office space for the Special Prosecutor’s Office, which has yet to relocate to a government building that was allocated to them over two years ago. “In this regard, we have submitted an additional request to the Government of Montenegro, urging state authorities—particularly the Property Administration and the Ministry of Urban Planning and Spatial Planning—to be more vigilant and proactive in addressing this issue. It is critical to resolve the accommodation needs for the Special State Prosecutor’s Office (SDT) as well as for the Higher Prosecutor’s Office in Podgorica”, Marković stated. He further emphasized that they are in active communication with executive authorities and local administrations to ensure that the Basic State Prosecutor’s Offices in Pljevlja, Rožaje, and Bar receive suitable workspaces.
Minister of Justice Bojan Božović stated that solving all the issues facing the prosecution offices within a year is impossible, particularly the lack of adequate space. However, he acknowledged his right to criticize the executive branch he is part of.
“It is unacceptable that we have not resolved the issue of spatial capacities for such a prolonged period, especially for the Special State Prosecutor’s Office and the Special Police Department. I hope this will be addressed promptly and that we will finalize the relocation of the Ministry of Justice so that these premises can be allocated to the State Prosecutor’s Office”, the minister said.
The report also revealed that the Prosecutorial Council reviewed 199 complaints in 2023 and 204 in 2024, which represent only a portion of the decisions made. This led HRA’s director, Tea Gorjanc-Prelević, to suggest the professionalization of certain council member roles. “The workload highlights the same issue as with the Judicial Council, indicating that the professionalization of at least some members’ roles should be seriously considered.”
The author of the analysis, lawyer Veselin Radulović, addressed the issue of missing members of the Prosecutorial Council and recommended the urgent election of two members under the old law, contrary to the decision of the Parliamentary Committee for Political System, Judiciary, and Administration. The Committee, following the provisions of the new legal framework, requested the Bar Association to propose a candidate for the Council.
“It is logical and completely natural that the missing members should be elected in the same manner as those they are replacing. If the procedure follows the Committee’s approach, we will have a Council partially elected under the old law and partially under the new amendments concerning the new mandate”, Radulović stated.
Andrej Raspopović, a representative of the Bar Association, expressed several concerns about the Association’s obligations regarding candidate proposals.
“The law does not mandate us to announce a public call. How are we supposed to select one member? Should we self-initiate and say—this is our representative, and they are automatically accepted?” Raspopović asked.
Slavica Mirković, Secretary of the Committee for Political System, Judiciary, and Administration, clarified that the Bar Association should issue a public call and inform the Committee of the candidate’s name. The information will then be forwarded to the plenary session, where, she said, the final decision will be made by MPs.
The HRA report revealed improvements in decisions on evaluation of prosecutors, noting that “not all state prosecutors are graded with excellent marks anymore”. However, the HRA believes further work on the Law on the State Prosecution Service is needed in this area.
“The law should mandate that the quality of prosecutors’ work be assessed based on approved or rejected motions for detention, appeals against dismissed criminal charges, final court verdicts, as well as the number of convictions and upheld appeals”, Radulović stated.
Acting Supreme State Prosecutor Milorad Marković announced that they are in the process of finalizing a Rulebook on criteria for evaluating prosecutors. However, he acknowledged the complexities involved in assessing prosecutors’ performance and noted that experts from the Council of Europe did not recommend evaluations based solely on court decisions.
Prosecutor Danka Živković emphasized that many factors influencing prosecutors’ work are beyond their control.
“Numerous aspects of prosecutors’ work depend on the courts, including the confirmation of indictments and various other decisions. These are important factors to consider”, Živković stated.
Prosecutor Đaletić advocated for specific evaluation criteria, particularly concerning the implementation of mandatory instructions regarding detention proposals.
“In the normative commission, we discussed the proposal to mandate that all prosecutors adhere to the instructions of the Supreme State Prosecutor. These instructions serve as general guidelines”, Đaletić noted.
Concerning the accountability of state prosecutors for disciplinary violations and ethical breaches, the HRA noted that the necessary amendments to the Law on the State Prosecution Service were not finalized by June, when the law was adopted to meet IBAR requirements.
“Disciplinary violations are not adequately defined, allowing some serious breaches of the law to go unpunished, and the descriptions of disciplinary violations still overlap with ethical breaches.” The analysis indicated that no cases of disciplinary responsibility for state prosecutors have been determined in the past two years.
Prosecutorial Council member Stevo Muk highlighted a fundamental issue regarding complaints against prosecutors.
“The source of some of our confusion lies in the vague and incomplete legal definition of jurisdiction”, he stated.
Marija Vuksanović from the Council of Europe sought clarification on the commission’s scope concerning decision-making on complaints.
“What types of complaints can the commission address, and what constitutes sensible matters for them to address, without encroaching on ethical, disciplinary, or criminal responsibility?” Vuksanović inquired.
The HRA recommended amending the Law on the State Prosecutor’s Office to refine the descriptions of disciplinary violations.
This amendment would ensure a clear distinction from breaches of the Ethical Code and provide sanctions for failures that undermine justice.
The draft report (in Montenegrin) discussed during the meeting is available here.
The report was prepared as part of the project “Judiciary Reform for the Rule of Law,” implemented by HRA with support from the regional project “SMART Balkans – Civil Society for a Connected Western Balkans,” carried out by the Center for Civil Society Promotion (CPCD) and its partners, with financial support from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of Norway.
Photograph: Filip Roganović