On the occasion of the International Human Rights Day, last Sunday we organized a trial simulation for the case “Milić and Nikezić v. Montenegro” for law school students. The simulation of the trial was presented by lawyer Azra Jasavić, who normally represented the victims in the case before the European Court of Human Rights, and Jelena Rašović, associate representative of Montenegro before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR).
The case was presented to the students, where Ms. Jasavić pointed out what kind of climate was necessary for activism and opposition to the state authorities in the period when this case of torture happened, and that it was in a way that broke the judicial practice. The case also opened a chance for all young lawyers to be able to change judicial practice in the future. Jasavić recalled that, after talking with the victims at ZIKS and seeing the injuries, she analyzed the case with colleagues from the Youth Initiative for Human Rights (YIHR), where they came to the conclusion that it was a case of torture.
With the help of YIHR, a criminal complaint was filed against the police officers, and the prosecutor ordered an investigation and demanded the exclusion of the recordings. The judge obtained the footage, but only from the part of the corridor where it is least visible that these two people were beaten, but what was crucial in the given case is that in the given situation Milić and Nikezić, although beaten, did not resist. However, here the state defended itself by saying that the victims resisted and prevented the police officers from performing their official duties. The lawyer then states that they received a decision on the rejection of the criminal complaint against the police officers, where it is stated that there are no elements of the criminal offense of abuse and torture and since there is no other criminal offense that is prosecuted ex officio, the prosecutor stated that the police officers did indeed use force, but within its powers.
After that, this decision was quickly informed by the media, which supported the victims and their representatives through articles in the daily, so that the whole public could see what was happening. At that moment, the entire system was brought to the brink of a fait accompli, and it was necessary to react in order for the system to start functioning adequately. Then, seven months after the disputed event, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against 3 of the 15 police officers for excessive use of force. A petition was submitted to the ECtHR for violation of Article 3 of the Convention on Human Rights, which determined that there had been a violation of Article 3, as well as a violation of procedural aspects.
Jelena Rašović, an associate of the representative of Montenegro before the ECtHR, explained to the students the role of this institution and how citizens can claim their rights before it. She pointed out that the defendant state has the opportunity to submit a legal defense, and that the state is obliged to obtain relevant documentation from all actors (in this particular case ZIKS, the Basic Court in Danilovgrad and the Basic Prosecutor’s Office). She reminded how the state protected itself and how the procedure before the ECtHR works in general.
The trial simulation is part of the project “No impunity for human rights violations in Montenegro”, financially supported by the European Union and co-financed by the Ministry of Public Administration.
On the occasion of the International Human Rights Day, last Sunday we organized a trial simulation for the case “Milić and Nikezić v. Montenegro” for law school students. The simulation of the trial was presented by lawyer Azra Jasavić, who normally represented the victims in the case before the European Court of Human Rights, and Jelena Rašović, associate representative of Montenegro before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR).
The case was presented to the students, where Ms. Jasavić pointed out what kind of climate was necessary for activism and opposition to the state authorities in the period when this case of torture happened, and that it was in a way that broke the judicial practice. The case also opened a chance for all young lawyers to be able to change judicial practice in the future. Jasavić recalled that, after talking with the victims at ZIKS and seeing the injuries, she analyzed the case with colleagues from the Youth Initiative for Human Rights (YIHR), where they came to the conclusion that it was a case of torture.
With the help of YIHR, a criminal complaint was filed against the police officers, and the prosecutor ordered an investigation and demanded the exclusion of the recordings. The judge obtained the footage, but only from the part of the corridor where it is least visible that these two people were beaten, but what was crucial in the given case is that in the given situation Milić and Nikezić, although beaten, did not resist. However, here the state defended itself by saying that the victims resisted and prevented the police officers from performing their official duties. The lawyer then states that they received a decision on the rejection of the criminal complaint against the police officers, where it is stated that there are no elements of the criminal offense of abuse and torture and since there is no other criminal offense that is prosecuted ex officio, the prosecutor stated that the police officers did indeed use force, but within its powers.
After that, this decision was quickly informed by the media, which supported the victims and their representatives through articles in the daily, so that the whole public could see what was happening. At that moment, the entire system was brought to the brink of a fait accompli, and it was necessary to react in order for the system to start functioning adequately. Then, seven months after the disputed event, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against 3 of the 15 police officers for excessive use of force. A petition was submitted to the ECtHR for violation of Article 3 of the Convention on Human Rights, which determined that there had been a violation of Article 3, as well as a violation of procedural aspects.
Jelena Rašović, an associate of the representative of Montenegro before the ECtHR, explained to the students the role of this institution and how citizens can claim their rights before it. She pointed out that the defendant state has the opportunity to submit a legal defense, and that the state is obliged to obtain relevant documentation from all actors (in this particular case ZIKS, the Basic Court in Danilovgrad and the Basic Prosecutor’s Office). She reminded how the state protected itself and how the procedure before the ECtHR works in general.
The trial simulation is part of the project “No impunity for human rights violations in Montenegro”, financially supported by the European Union and co-financed by the Ministry of Public Administration.
