Bosnia’s Constitutional Court rejected as unfounded the request of the former Chief Prosecutor, Gordana Tadic, to temporarily suspend the execution of the decision of the country’s top judicial body to remove her from the post until the end of the proceedings before the Constitutional Court in her case.
In the appeal, Tadic stated that the disputed decisions violated her right to a fair trial, arguing that the application of substantive and procedural law was arbitrary, biased, and without a legal explanation.
Tadic was removed from the post in October last year by the High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council (HJPC), which appoints, dismisses and disciplines judicial officials.
Tadic stands accused of “negligence in performing official duties” and “failure, for unjustified reasons, to comply with the decisions, orders or requests of the Council.”
Specifically, the commission determined that Tadic assigned cases to judicial prosecutors according to her own will and not through the CMS system that automatically distributes them.
Tadic in her appeal alleged that the consequences of her conduct were not described in the operative part of the decisions of the First Instance Commission and the Second Instance Commission, nor were they determined during the proceedings.
The Constitutional Court of BiH stated that the appellant did not present any special reasons and arguments, but that the request was based on the allegations she made in relation to the violation of the right to a fair trial.
“Having in mind the above, and especially the complete absence of arguments as to why the Constitutional Court should issue an interim measure in this case, the Constitutional Court considers that the appellant, apart from allegations concerning the merits of the dispute, did not offer arguments and evidence prima facie the necessity of determining the requested interim measure. Therefore, the Constitutional Court considers the appellant's request for an interim measure unfounded because in the circumstances of the specific case, there is nothing to indicate that the adoption of an interim measure would be in the interest of the parties or the proper conduct of the proceedings “, the decision of the Constitutional Court of BiH states.