We continue our activities with the aim of raising awareness about the suppression of police torture in the form of two workshops for judges, prosecutors and candidates for prosecutors, with the aim of improving the work of the judicial system in this area.
At the first workshop intended for prosecutors and candidates for prosecutors, with a lecture by prosecutor Danka Ivanović Đerić, cases of police torture were discussed, where Ms. Đerić cited the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) that pointed to errors in the proceedings before domestic courts. The problem of lack of cooperation among police officers was highlighted, which made investigative procedures more difficult, but despite this, it was observed that the number of cases of police torture in the last year has been on the decline. However, relative to the size of our country, that figure is still staggeringly high, with 110 recorded cases of police torture since 2015, when records have been kept. As a result, there is a large number of police officers who are being prosecuted for torture, and in addition, Montenegro is recognized as a country where torture is a pronounced problem. This is supported by the large number of cases that have not been sufficiently investigated, and those that are still in the investigation phase.
Another challenge is that the Montenegrin prosecutor’s office is not independent from the police when investigating criminal offenses, which is recognized as a systemic problem that needs to be solved at the national level. the challenge is that the prosecution in the investigation is not independent from the police. This is a systemic problem that needs to be solved at the national level, so it is necessary for the prosecution to be independent from the police when investigating a criminal offense.
As she stated, the internal control of police work was recognized as a good solution, and through whose work one can come to someone’s responsibility, and a large number of cases were formed precisely on the basis of data from the internal control of the police. Also, as one of the possible good solutions, the formation of a special operational team within the Police Administration was proposed. In this way, there would be inter-institutional cooperation, which has been shown to be a very good and effective solution, especially in cases of human trafficking.
She advised her younger colleagues to always treat cases of police torture as urgent and a priority.
Internal control of the police was recognized as a good solution, through whose work one can come to someone’s responsibility, and a large number of cases were formed precisely on the basis of data from this department. In addition, another good suggestion is the formation of a special operational team within the Police Administration. In this way, there would be inter-institutional cooperation, which has been shown in practice to be a very good and efficient solution, especially in cases of human trafficking.
The participants of the second workshop (judges and prosecutors) discussed in detail the judicial proceedings related to cases of police torture through the meaning and practical application of the standards and requirements derived from Articles 3 and 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights. A special focus of the workshop, with lectures by Constitutional Court judge Snezana Armenko and High Court judge Nenad Vujanović, was on the importance of valid records when detaining individuals, in order to ensure impartial and efficient processing of cases. Nenad Vujanović recalled the standards of the European Court of Human Rights regarding the criminal acts of torture and ill-treatment, that for torture e.g. it requires a certain weight, the existence of intention and the like. When it comes to deprivation of liberty, the importance of proper records, which must contain all the information: when the person was deprived of liberty, whether he was warned of his rights, whether there was a need to hire an interpreter, whether there were any visible violations, was particularly highlighted. and, if so, whether the doctor was informed, whether he was provided with food and the like.
Judge Vujanović told the participants that as prosecutors and judges, they must have a more proactive role, starting with ascertaining visible injuries, and that in the event of their existence, they must hire an expert, then establish as precisely as possible the factual situation related to the specific case. The measures in the detention rooms must be such that there is no concealment of disputed items, that the camera recordings are not deleted, because sometimes this would lead to harm, and sometimes it would benefit the police officer.
That’s why he emphasized the need for the independence of the prosecution from the police during investigative procedures and that courts and prosecutors are crucial in ensuring that the procedures are impartial and efficient.
Snezana Armenko emphasized the issue of extracting legally (in)valid evidence, but also the issue of the independence of the Constitutional Court, which is one of the dilemmas this court faces. It is necessary that this institution conducts the proceedings independently, and that its independence and impartiality are not jeopardized. Regarding the presentation of evidence, this issue is of particular importance when a decision needs to be made, and no other evidence can be presented. In that sense, this is already the jurisdiction of the criminal courts, not the Constitutional Court, and at this stage it would represent a direct encroachment on its independence, which the European Court of Human Rights does not do either. The Constitutional Court has the duty to determine in the end that everything was carried out according to the principle of fairness.
At the workshop, the importance of distinguishing between unfounded and illegal detention was emphasized, that is, that illegal detention does not have to be unfounded in order to be illegal.
They also reminded that there was a change in the functioning of the OTD for criminal acts of violence, so after the case of the murder of Šejla Bakija, every report ended with a decision to order custody.
The workshops were organized within the project “Without impunity for the violation and violation of human rights in Montenegro”, financially supported by the European Union and co-financed by the Ministry of Public Administration.
