The independence of public prosecutors is crucial for the judiciary”: interview with Mariarosaria Guglielmi, president of MEDEL, broadcast by the Serbian TV channel Insajder
Prosecutor’s Office for Organized Crime in Serbia is facing increasing pressure and accusations that call into question its independence, while at the same time police often refuse to act according to the orders of that prosecutor’s office – we regularly report on all of that in the program. The non existence of prosecutorial police and announcement that POOC will be placed under the jurisdiction of Higher Prosecutor’s Office, further jeopardize fight against corruption and efficiency of investigations. President of the European Association of Judges and Prosecutors for Democracy and Freedom (MEDEL), Mariarosaria Guglielmi, emphasizes in an interview for “Svet i mi” that prosecutors and judges have the right and obligation to speak out publicly when the rule of law is threatened, reminding us that their independence is crucial for maintaining citizens’ trust in the judiciary.
In Europe, as well as in Serbia, there is a growing pressure and attacks by high political and institutional authorities not only on prosecutors, but also on judges – relating to their decisions and investigations, Mariarosaria Guglielmi says.
All of the mentioned is accompanied by an aggressive communication strategy and strategy on social media, which represents prosecutors and judges as enemies of the people and political opponents of those in power.
“This intolerance of the authorities towards the system of controls and balances required by the rule of law is a clear and worrying sign of the erosion of rule of law. Attacks on judges and prosecutors represent a clear violation of powers’ separation, which not only undermines citizens’ trust in the judicial system, but also threatens their safety, in the courtroom and outside it,” Giuliemi says.
European Network of Judiciary Councils said that the councils of judges and prosecutors must show leadership and courage to act without delay, using all the means at their disposal. This may include public advocacy on behalf of the judiciary, as well as individual judges and prosecutors publicly seek support and engage in dialogue with other branches of government and European institutions.
“Citizens need to understand what independence of judiciary and prosecutors means for them – for their rights, freedoms, democracy and the rule of law. That means that judges and prosecutors have to play an active role in establishing and maintaining an open and transparent dialogue with the public and civil society,” the MEDEL President emphasized.
The current situation in the judiciary in Serbia is complicated, while some prosecutors claim that the police refused to act on their orders in several major cases. Another problem is non existence of prosecutorial police.
“This is a key issue in the fight against corruption. Prosecutors have to cooperate with the judicial police, as well as to have human and financial resources to act. Prosecutors are facing a number of complex challenges, especially in high-level corruption cases – not only technical problems, but also attempts by politicians to exert unlawful influence on investigations,” Guglielmi said.
In Italy, where she lives, ability of prosecutors to conduct investigations directly and through the judicial police played a key role in the efficiency of investigations of the most serious crimes, corruption and organized crime. This is possible because the Italian Constitution stipulates that the judicial branch, which of course includes prosecutors, directly manages the judicial police.
Beside non existence of prosecutorial police, another problem which escalated in Serbia is an attempt to place the Prosecutor’s Office for Organized Crime under the jurisdiction of High Court.
“I would like to emphasize the Italian experience once again, because most Italian legal experts have wondered why judicial efforts to expose systemic corruption only became effective in the early 1990s, when the investigation known as “Mani Pulite” was launched. That was the result of high degree of independence of the judiciary and the prosecution, which was guaranteed by the institutional framework – not only by other branches of government, but also by their own superiors. As all international sources emphasize, whatever solution is adopted regarding the structure of the anti-corruption prosecution or specialized units, it is necessary to prevent any risk of undue influence, whether internal or external. This requires the exclusion of political influence by the executive branch from the appointment or dismissal of those who manage or have direct or indirect control over public prosecutors’ offices dealing with the fight against corruption, but also over public prosecutors in general,” Guglielmi explains.
There are numerous charters, documents and recommendations at European and international level that emphasize that independence of prosecution service and individual prosecutors is a key component of the rule of law, and that independence of prosecutors is a necessary companion to the independence of the entire judiciary. When these documents talk about independence, they mean that prosecutors should be autonomous in their decision-making when carrying out their duties, free from political and external pressures.
“If there is a gap between these principles and the practice in their daily work – when prosecutors, are under pressure such as in Europe, or the target of smear campaigns – it is a clear and worrying sign of the erosion of the rule of law,” Mariarosaria Guglielmi, President of the European Association of Judges and Prosecutors for Democracy and Freedoms said.