The parliamentary Judiciary Committee on Tuesday did not support by a majority vote any of the candidates for the Supreme Court president after four of them presented their programmes and answered questions from committee members, state agency Hina reported.

The candidates who presented their programmes and were interviewed by the Judiciary Committee today were Zlata Djurdjevic, Lana Peto-Kujundzic, Snjezana Rizvan and Sime Savic, while Boris Vukovic decided to withdraw his candidacy.

The committee’s whose decision on them is not binding on the constitutional proposer, the President of the Republic.

Djurdjević: I did not take part in unlawful procedure

Presenting her programme, Zlata Djurdjevic, with whose nomination President Zoran Milanovic ploughs ahead while the parliamentary majority opposes it, stressed that the main principle she was guided by when writing her programme was for the Croatian judiciary to move on from a period of transition to the period of the rule of law.

The ultimate goal, she said, is restoring the trust of citizens in the judiciary, which “has fallen low, with trends being negative”. She pointed to mistakes and interpretations applied by judges, noting that “the aim is to create a judiciary that will be efficient, transparent, responsible and professional” and that in terms of transparency, Croatia was at the bottom in the EU.

That can be changed very quickly, she said.

She stressed that the Supreme Court president had all the mechanisms to determine if stalling in cases was due to objective or subjective reasons, and she also called for selecting judges in an open and transparent way.

“That is not the case now,” she said, adding that the judiciary had to be digitalised.

Judiciary independent, but not perceived as such by public

Asked by HDZ MP Damir Habijan why she had agreed to take part in a procedure that was not in line with the law, Djurdjevic said that it was the gravest accusation against her coming from political circles.

“I did not violate the Constitution nor did I take part in an unlawful procedure. I was not obliged to respond to the first public call. The procedure in my case started at the moment when the President of the Republic asked me if I wanted to be a candidate. The first public call had already been published. When I agreed to be a candidate, I waited for the second call and applied after it was published. I agreed, and after that the procedure became the responsibility of the President of the Republic,” she explained.

She added that the only task of judges and the president of the highest court was to respect the Constitution and laws.

“Negotiations or discussions with political bodies that are in charge of this process are not acceptable and no one can ask of me to be a secret candidate. It seems this discussion is heading in that direction,” she added.

Asked by HDZ MP Marija Jelkovac if the Croatian judiciary was independent, Đurđević said that it was but that it was not perceived as such by the public.

“I think that the Croatian judiciary has all the mechanisms to be fully independent,” she said.

“I am in no way in favour of the parliament electing judges, but one should think about the composition of the State Judicial Council,” she said in response to HDZ MP Drazen Bosnjakovic’s question about the preferred model for the election of judges.

Question about JNA political

Asked by Bridge MP Nikola Grmoja to elaborate on her position on the extradition of former Yugoslav and Croatian intelligence officials Josip Perkovic and Zdravko Mustac to Germany, Djurdjevic said that in most EU countries the extradition of one’s own nationals was prohibited after the expiry of the statute of limitations.

She added that her position referred to the practice of the European Court and that it “was completely taken out of context.”

“All of this is a show for the public, and we are just asking the two presidents to agree. That should not be so,” she said.

Independent MP Karolina Vidovic-Kristo wanted to know if for Djurdjevic the Yugoslav People’s Army (JNA) was a legal army or an aggressor army after the declaration of Croatia’s independence on 25 June 1991, to which Djurdjevic said that her question was of a political nature and stressed that she was not in a political campaign and would not answer political questions.

Candidate Lana Peto-Kujundzic said in her address to the Judiciary Committee that the Supreme Court had to be efficient but should enable other courts as well, with its authority, to be efficient.

She underlined the importance of courts having the same level of technical equipment and being more open to the public.

Supreme Court should be a group of wise people

Asked by committee member Tonči Restovic to assess the work of current Supreme Court president Djuro Sessa, Peto-Kujundzic said that he was “a little bit invisible”, adding that she advocated specialisation of Supreme Court judges.

The Supreme Court should be a group of wise people who will give us legal opinions on individual legal questions. Facts should be determined by lower courts, she said.

Candidate Snjezana Rizvan said, while presenting her programme, that she did not consider the judiciary corrupt but that long trials and inefficiency of judges were problematic.

Asked by HDZ MP Marija Jelkovac how she would increase efficiency, Rizvan said that without compliance with legal deadlines for court cases no major changes in the judiciary would be possible.

She said that she would increase court efficiency by introducing hearings via video link and limiting the number of postponements of hearings.

Candidate Sime Savic said that the main problem of the judiciary were uneven court practices.

“The Supreme Court has not fulfilled its purpose in that regard and that causes chaos and excessively long proceedings. Oversight of judges should be stepped up and judges who cause harm to the judiciary should be replaced because most judges do their job professionally and honestly,” he said.

Grmoja calls on president, PM to reach agreement

In a vote at the end of the session, none of the candidates received the support of a majority of committee members, with only MP Grmoja saying that he had a positive opinion of all the candidates.

He noted that it was clear that the Supreme Court president would not be elected without an agreement between the prime minister and the head of state.

“We can call for dialogue, call on them to stop trading accusations… I believe that that is the only right way,” he said.

The candidate for the Supreme Court president is proposed by the President of the Republic, with prior advisory opinions from the parliamentary Judiciary Committee and the general meeting of the Supreme Court, which in mid-May did not give a positive opinion on any of the five candidates.

Current Supreme Court president Sessa’s term expires in July and if the parliament does not elect his successor by then, the office will be temporarily taken over by his deputy Marin Mrcela.