10 Nov Insufficient transparency and omissions in the selection of the Basic Public Prosecutor of the Basic Public Prosecutor’s Office for Prosecution of Organized Crime and Corruption

The Blueprint group for judicial reforms expresses its opinion on the lack of transparency and the omissions made during the selection of the Basic Public Prosecutor of the Basic Public Prosecutor’s Office for Prosecution of Organized Crime and Corruption (OJO-GOKK), which was conducted on November 7, 2022. The selection of the Basic Public Prosecutor of OJO-GOKK was made after a previously published announcement on September 30, 2022. For the first time, the selection of the Basic Public Prosecutor of the OJO-GOKK is carried out by all public prosecutors in the country, and the Council of Public Prosecutors of the Republic of North Macedonia has the authority only to conclude the selection according to the will of the public prosecutors (pursuant to the Law on Public Prosecution adopted in 2020 and amendments to the Law on the Council of Public Prosecutors from 2020). The Blueprint Group considers this method of selection of the Basic Public Prosecutor of the OJO-GOKK to be an advanced process that affects the advancement of the independence of public prosecutors and the internal control of the public prosecutor’s profession. In line with this method of selection, the interest of 163 public prosecutors[1] who participated in the election of the Basic Public Prosecutor of OJO-GOKK is also indicative. [1] A total of four candidates were nominated in these elections, while a total of 163 public prosecutors from 5 polling stations had the right to vote: Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office Bitola, Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office Gostivar, Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office Skopje, Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office Shtip and the Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of North Macedonia (JORSM). According to the data published by the Commission for the implementation of the elections, 154 public prosecutors voted.

However, the Blueprint group notes that there were omissions during the procedure for the selection of the Basic Public Prosecutor of the OJO-GOKK. Namely, the selection process was insufficiently transparent, so data on the professional career was missing for the four candidates. The public, and especially the expert public, did not have the opportunity to familiarize themselves with the proposed program of the candidates, which would instill confidence in the process, and would affect trust in the institution. This is especially important if we take into account that we are talking about a Prosecutor who will manage the Basic Public Prosecutor’s Office for Prosecution of Organized Crime and Corruption, whose actions are of high interest to the public, are exposed in the media and significantly influence the formation of opinion and trust of the public in the prosecution and the judiciary in general.

In that direction, the Blueprint Group believes that a significant improvement of transparency in the process is needed, whereby the public, especially the expert public, needs to be familiar with the professional career and competences of the candidates and their plans for the development and management of the OJO-GOKK. The Blueprint Group points out that even the minimum standards for the selection process to be considered transparent were not observed, because the biographies of the candidates with their professional competencies were not published on the website of the Council of Public Prosecutors, which conducts the elections.

The Blueprint Group also expresses concern about the way of publishing unofficial information about the election of the Basic Public Prosecutor of OJO-GOKK before the votes were officially collected by the Commission for the implementation of the elections and expects an objective and impartial report based on evidence and official sources.

Given that strengthening the accountability, independence and impartiality, as well as transparency of all judicial institutions is imperative in the Judicial Reform Strategy (2017-2022), the Blueprint Group on Justice Reform indicates that more focus is necessary in the future on transparency in the election processes in judicial authorities, so as not to create doubts in the election, which affect trust in the institutions.

• • Macedonian Young Lawyers Association
• • European Policy Institute
• • Institute for Human Rights
• • Coalition All For Fair Trials
• • Helsinki Committee for Human Rights
• • Center for Legal Research and Analysis
• • Open Society Foundation – Macedonia

[1] A total of four candidates were nominated in these elections, while a total of 163 public prosecutors from 5 polling stations had the right to vote: Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office Bitola, Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office Gostivar, Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office Skopje, Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office Shtip and the Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of North Macedonia (JORSM). According to the data published by the Commission for the implementation of the elections, 154 public prosecutors voted.