Referendum in Serbia - as fair as the elections

Photo: EPA / SRDJAN SUKI

The referendum to change the Constitution in the field of justice is announced for January 16, 2022. As an introduction, amendments to the referendum and expropriation laws were adopted, leading to protests in Serbia.

The citizens of Serbia with YES or NO will answer in a referendum the question "Are you in favor of confirming the act to change the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia?". These changes in the field of justice, as stated by the Minister of Justice Maja Popovic, should "exclude the participation of politics in the election of judges, court presidents, public prosecutors and deputy public prosecutors."

"Greater independence of judges and greater independence of public prosecutors will mean their greater responsibility, which creates conditions for better and more effective protection of human rights and increased legal security," promised Minister Popovic.

"Unlimited Autocracy"

Law professor Vesna Rakic ​​Vodinelic told DW that the announced changes to the Constitution "will not lead to greater independence of judges, independence of public prosecutors and exclusion of politics." Because all these bodies that are supposed to generate judges and prosecutors, such as the High Judicial Council and the State Council of Prosecutors, will have members elected by parliament. The Assembly is a par excellence political institution, where the rules are dictated by the majority. "The independence of judges and prosecutors requires, above all, a democratic environment, and now we have an autocracy that is not hindered by anything," said our interlocutor.

"No text can guarantee the independence of the judiciary," lawyer and human rights activist Milan Antonijevic told DW. "But everything that the legal experts and the Venice Commission have considered speaks in favor of the fact that this proposal for changes is something that can have effects. "For the independence of judges and prosecutors to have effects, it is necessary to have people who are ready to carry that independence on their shoulders, and that really does not depend on any document," Antonijevic said.

The legal changes sparked protests

As a kind of introduction to the upcoming referendum, the Law on Referendum was amended, after which a 50 percent census plus one vote is no longer required for the referendum to succeed. The majority of the number of people who went to the polls will be enough to decide on the referendum issue. The adoption of this law now coincided with the months of dissatisfaction of the citizens due to the arrival of the company Rio Tinto in Serbia, and the public is convinced that these changes also succeed in the government's attempts to enable the company to operate lithium mining at any cost. .

That is why Vesna Rakic ​​Vodinelic notes that "although our state officials emphasize that it will not affect the opening of the mines, I am convinced that it will. Because the referendum will be as fair and free as our elections are fair and free. "The referendum is conducted in the same way as the elections and there are no guarantees that the citizens will be able to freely express their will and that the votes will be counted fairly," said Vesna Rakic ​​Vodinelic.

The mentioned amendments to the Law on Referendum, as well as the amendments to the Law on Expropriation, led to great dissatisfaction among the citizens of Serbia, which spilled over into the streets with days of protests. According to critics of the Law on Expropriation, "it legalizes the seizure of private property that will be in the way of state projects."

Profit or public interest?

Milan Antonijevic thinks that the messages sent by the President of Serbia are really worrying, saying that "this law was adopted, not because of Rio Tinto, but because of the construction of a national stadium" and adds that "it is not good if this law is passed once and for all use ".

"I think that in the future any misuse of this law will still be answered by both domestic and international courts, such as the European Court of Human Rights, so I think citizens can be much calmer than it seems at the moment," he said. Antonijevic.

The basis for expropriation has always been the public interest, explains Vesna Rakic ​​Vodinelic, "but the problem with this law is that now with these small door changes a new basis for expropriation is introduced, which is an international agreement, in which one side is the state of Serbia, and the second or a foreign country or foreign corporation. The government can declare that agreement a project of public importance. "This is how it can happen that the profit needs of some foreign corporations are declared in the public interest," warns Vesna Rakic ​​Vodinelic.

With violence against freedom of assembly

The protests of the citizens that took place in the past few days throughout Serbia, certainly met with strong condemnation from the authorities, who tried to present the dissatisfaction of the people with the incompetent laws as "preventing the freedom of movement guaranteed by the Constitution". The regime media and state leaders persistently repeated this mantra of freedom of movement, completely bypassing the objections to the mentioned laws and the justification of the popular discontent.

"The state's response in the form of hammers, sticks and excavators shows that freedom of assembly is not respected at all," said Milan Antonijevic, who believes that "in this way, fear continues to be sown among the citizens."

"The state and the government must learn that when the situation worsens, they can expect protests that have a much sharper character." "The responsibility does not lie with those who take to the streets, because any action of the state that endangers the rights of citizens rightly encounters resistance," Antonijevic said.

Vesna Rakiќ Vodineliќ points out that it is wrong to think that freedom of assembly is valid only when the gathering is registered. "When the right of assembly and the right of free movement collide, I think there is an important context, and that is that the voice of the citizens must be heard, and a one-hour traffic stop is a reasonable reaction. "And the fact that the president of the country, on this occasion, addressed human rights for the first time, is grotesque," concludes Vesna Rakic ​​Vodinelic.

 

Source: Deutsche Welle

[sc name=”dw” ][/sc]

Dear reader,

Our access to web content is free, because we believe in equality in information, regardless of whether someone can pay or not. Therefore, in order to continue our work, we ask for the support of our community of readers by financially supporting the Free Press. Become a member of Sloboden Pechat to help the facilities that will enable us to deliver long-term and quality information and TOGETHER let's ensure a free and independent voice that will ALWAYS BE ON THE PEOPLE'S SIDE.

SUPPORT A FREE PRESS.
WITH AN INITIAL AMOUNT OF 60 DENARS

Video of the day