Joshevska: “Potentially worrying precedent” after Constitutional Court reports judge for not executing ruling

The Judicial Council is processing a notification from the Constitutional Court that a judge at a Basic Court in Skopje allegedly failed to respect a Constitutional Court ruling on violations of freedom of expression linked to the storming of the Parliament on April 27, ten years ago.

The notice concerns a decision by a civil court judge who, according to the Constitutional Court, rejected as new evidence material related to a case about endangering and violating a journalist’s freedom of expression during the April 27 incident.

One of the first public reactions came from Judicial Council member Suzana Joshevska Anastasovska, who called the notification a “potentially worrying precedent” and warned of possible institutional pressure on the judiciary.

Facebook statement by Suzana Joshevska Anastasovska, member of the Judicial Council

"Sending a Constitutional Court decision to the Judicial Council 'for further action', in which an interpretation of a procedural law by a regular judge, in a still-unfinished proceeding, is qualified as 'non‑execution of a Constitutional Court decision', with an implication of criminal liability, in my personal opinion, raises serious questions about the boundaries between constitutional control and judicial independence. I would say that it also touches on questions of possible institutional pressure."

Joshevska did not answer requests for comment, and the president of the Judicial Council, Aleksandar Kambovski, was not available for additional statements. In addition to notifying the Judicial Council, the Constitutional Court also informed the Prosecutor's Office about the alleged non‑execution of its ruling.

The Constitutional Court has, for the first time, invoked its authority to follow up on the execution of its decisions and to notify the competent institutions and investigative bodies. "On the basis of previously received data and notifications, the Constitutional Court may adopt a special decision establishing that its ruling has not been executed and shall notify the competent public prosecutor's office, as well as the body that appointed or elected the head of the authority or body that failed to execute the Court's decision," reads Article 91 of the Act of the Constitutional Court.

At the same time, judges enjoy constitutional and statutory immunity. Article 65 of the Law on Courts states: "(1) Judges, in performing the judicial function, enjoy immunity. (2) A judge may not be subjected to criminal liability for expressions of opinion and decisions made when issuing a judicial decision." The Judicial Council and the Prosecutor's Office now face a dilemma between enforcing decisions that protect freedom of expression and safeguarding judicial independence where a judge has relied on the law in refusing to admit evidence in an unfinished proceeding.

Miomir Serafinovic

Photo: press material from the event