{"id":19985,"date":"2016-06-24T11:09:00","date_gmt":"2016-06-24T09:09:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/127.0.0.1\/never-ending-criminal-trials-mira-markovics-trial-adjourned-50-times-over-13-years\/"},"modified":"2019-09-04T18:34:17","modified_gmt":"2019-09-04T16:34:17","slug":"never-ending-criminal-trials-mira-markovics-trial-adjourned-50-times-over-13-years","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.cins.rs\/en\/never-ending-criminal-trials-mira-markovics-trial-adjourned-50-times-over-13-years\/","title":{"rendered":"Never-Ending Criminal Trials: Mira Markovi\u0107\u2019s Trial Adjourned 50 Times over 13 Years"},"content":{"rendered":"

\n\tOne of the oldest pending cases in the Higher Court in Belgrade, the trial of Mira Markovi\u0107<\/strong> and another ten defendants, has been dragging on for 13 years already. Hearings have been adjourned at least 50 times, and the whole case has been remitted for retrial at least four times, which is bound to happen once again in September this year.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tHigher Public Prosecutor\u2019s Office pressed charges against the defendants of involvement in an illegal allocation of state-owned apartments in the year 2000. The trial has since been marked by adjournment of hearings, default of appearance by witnesses and repeated amendments of indictment. The case against two defendants was dropped due to the lapse of the statute of limitations.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\t

\n\t\t\u20ac 2.3 Million Paid in Expenses Incurred by 22 Acquitted<\/h2>\n\t

\n\t\tOne of the ongoing lengthy trials of the so-called Insolvency Mafia<\/em> started in 2007 when 35 persons were charged. To date, 22 defendants have either been acquitted or had their charges dropped.
\n\t\t
\n\t\tThe cost of the criminal proceedings only for those acquitted borne by the Higher Court in Belgrade amounted to approx. \u20ac 2.3 million. Over the course of nine years, the length of the trial so far, the court has paid for expert witnesses, ex officio<\/em> defence counsels and the costs related to witness testimonies.
\n\t\t
\n\t\tThe court also covered the cost of transferring the defendants from detention to the courtroom and it was also reimbursing salaries for four defendants totalling thus far about \u20ac 44,000. According to the law, detainees are entitled to receive up to a third of their previous salaries. Such an expense is borne by the entity which remanded them in custody \u2013 in this case it is the Higher Court in Belgrade.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n\tExcept for Mira Markovi\u0107, the wife of former Yugoslav president Slobodan Milo\u0161evi\u0107<\/strong> and the Yugoslav Left political party leader, among the defendants were also \u017divka Kne\u017eevi\u0107<\/strong>, former Serbian Government\u2019s secretary-general; Mihalj Kertes<\/strong>, former head of the Federal Customs Administration; Branislav Ivkovi\u0107<\/strong>, former science and technology minister; as well as many others.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tThis is only one out of 583 pending criminal trials before Serbian courts whose length in late 2015 spanned a whole decade. Higher Court in Belgrade had a backlog of 38 such cases. There were many more 5-year-or-older pending cases \u2013 as many as 2,188 in aggregate in all criminal courts.
\n\t
\n\tYears-long court proceedings endlessly defer meting out punishment for criminal offenders or, for that matter, prompt acquittal of those found to be not guilty as charged. At the same time, this creates a significant strain on the budgets of judicial institutions and further delays payment of damages to injured parties, be it the citizens or the state.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tCenter for Investigative Journalism<\/em> (CINS) interviewees cited difficulties in bringing suspects, lawyers and witnesses to trials, excessive workload for judges as well as changes to the justice system resulting in remission of cases as the reasons for lengthy court proceedings.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tAttending Hearings, Paying Lawyer and Wasting Time<\/h2>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\t\"\"<\/a>\n\t

\n\t\tInterpol arrest warrant for Mira Markovi\u0107, the spouse of former Yugoslav president Slobodan Milo\u0161evi\u0107<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n\tThe trial of Mira Markovi\u0107 and another ten defendants charged with abuse of public office for illegal allocation of apartments was scheduled to start a day after the assassination of prime minister Zoran \u0110in\u0111i\u0107<\/strong> on the 13th of March 2003.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tMarkovi\u0107 failed to show up at the first trial hearing. Later it would turn out she had left for Russia which is why she is on trial in absentia. This would not disrupt the trial, however, the court proceedings unfolded at a painfully slow pace for other reasons.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tMost of trial hearings scheduled for 2003 did take place and the defendants presented arguments in their defence. On the 27th of October the court ruled to retry the case due to \u201ca lapse of time\u201d as stated in the trial records.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tIn the following years, the trial hearings were often adjourned. In 2005 the hearings were adjourned at least four times. When eventually a trial hearing did take place on the 10th of November that year, the case was remitted once again due to \u201ca lapse of time\u201d.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\t

\n\t\tSuspended Sentence for Judge after Ten Long Years<\/h2>\n\t

\n\t\tOn the 11th of July, 2006, late in the evening, at a party following a football match in the village of Selevac near Smederevska Palanka, Milorad Mijailovi\u0107<\/strong> fell onto a concrete slab and sustained grave injury to his head. In March 2015, the Higher Court in Smederevo sentenced a police officer, Nikola \u0160ilji\u0107<\/strong>, to six months\u2019 house imprisonment for inflicting grave bodily injuries to Mijailovi\u0107. Two and a half months in detention were taken into account when pronouncing the sentence. Another two policemen were given one-year suspended sentences for abuse of public office.
\n\t\t
\n\t\tMarina Jovanovi\u0107-Bajovi\u0107<\/strong>, the then investigative judge with the Municipal Court in Smederevska Palanka, also received a guilty verdict as she had entered, in her capacity as on-duty judge, inaccurate information into the crime scene investigation record that night stating that a civilian had fallen on his own in order to prevent prosecution of the police officer for inflicting grave bodily injuries. According to the first-instance ruling, \u0160ilji\u0107 was his husband\u2019s friend.
\n\t\t
\n\t\tIn December 2015, the Appellate Court in Belgrade upheld the ruling in the part pertaining to what had happened, but amended the criminal charge against Marina Jovanovi\u0107-Bajovi\u0107 from \u201cviolation of law on the part of the on-duty judge\u201d into \u201caiding the perpetrator upon the commission of a criminal offence\u201d.
\n\t\t
\n\t\tAlmost ten years on, she received a one-year suspended sentence. She refused to speak to CINS journalists.
\n\t\t
\n\t\tBoban<\/strong>, Milorad Mijailovi\u0107\u2019s son, told CINS reporters his father\u2019s health was very poor. In his words, the trial was protracted, \u201cThere were many police officers there, and then they would come to give evidence, and then the lawyer fell ill so he couldn\u2019t do it\u2026 And so it was delayed, and I had to attend the hearings with my father. I\u2019ve been bringing him to the trial hearings for ten years, first in Smederevo, and then in Belgrade.\u201d <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n\tOne of the most common reasons for adjournment of trial hearings was default of appearance by witnesses. According to the record of the hearing scheduled for the 23rd of March, 2006, witnesses Sr\u0111an Nikoli\u0107<\/strong>, Zlatan Peru\u010di\u0107<\/strong> and Milunka Lazarevi\u0107<\/strong> failed to appear although the official notes read that \u201cthe trial chamber president contacted by phone the female witness who promised to appear\u201d in the courtroom.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tThe court records to which CINS gained access showed that not a single trial hearing took place in 2007, whereas the trial was adjourned at least three times in 2008. Thereafter, the trial chamber presiding judge retired and the justice system reform (election and re-election of judges) was launched, which further slowed down the proceedings.
\n\t
\n\tFrom 2012 through to 2015, trial hearings were scheduled, but never held. In addition, indictment was amended several times \u2013 the last time in April this year. The case has now been remitted once again to the phase of pre-trial review and the trial hearing is scheduled for September this year.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tIn the meantime, the case against two defendants \u2013 Bratislava Morina<\/strong>, former minister for refugees, internally displaced persons and humanitarian aid; and Petar Zekovi\u0107<\/strong>, former interior ministry official \u2013 was dropped due to the lapse of the statute of limitations.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tBranislav Ivkovi\u0107<\/strong>, one of the defendants, argued the charges against him were trumped up going on to say that the decision to award one of the apartments had been made by a seven-member commission, but only he was indicted.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cI was attending hearings at least four or five times a year, paying lawyer and wasting time,\u201d said Ivkovi\u0107 in response to the CINS journalist\u2019s question about the court proceedings.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tVeljko \u0110ur\u0111i\u0107<\/strong>, a defence counsel of defendant \u017divka Kne\u017eevi\u0107, said the excessive trial length was, among others, a consequence of an incomplete investigation, poorly collected evidence and amendments to the charges brought.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tIndictment against Mira Markovi\u0107 was amended twice \u2013 in 2010 and 2016, respectively. Her lawyer Zdenko Tomanovi\u0107<\/strong> said the 2010 amendment to the charges had been made only several days before the lapse of the statute of limitations, when the Prosecutor\u2019s Office converted the criminal offence of illegal mediation into the abuse of public office.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tOfficials of the Higher Public Prosecutor\u2019s Office were unwilling to comment on the case stating that this would be \u201cinappropriate\u201d and \u201ccounterproductive for the proceedings\u201d in a reply to the request for an interview.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tNeither the Higher Court in Belgrade would grant an interview request by the CINS journalist.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tCriminal Charges from Previous Century<\/h2>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tIn the end of the last year, out of the total of 583 pending criminal cases older than ten years, basic courts had a backlog of 519 and higher courts another 64. The Higher Court in Belgrade had 38 such cases, two of which were over 15 years old. Other higher courts had fewer than five such outstanding cases in their backlog.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\t\"\"<\/a>\n\t

\n\t\tIvana Rami\u0107, a judge of the First Basic Court in Belgrade, said the priority was to complete the criminal proceedings as soon as possible, adding that the defendants are entitled to this. She went on to say that at times defendants and their defence counsels take advantage of their rights, hence longer trials.
\n\t\t(Photo: CINS)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n\tBelgrade courts also rank at the top of list in terms of the backlog of 10-years-and-older cases in basic courts \u2013 27 such cases in the First, 22 in the Second and 19 in the Third Basic Court in the capital city.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tIn late 2015, there were 2,188 pending criminal cases older than five years on courts in Serbia. The Higher Court in Belgrade had 240 such cases and the Basic Court in Ni\u0161 \u2013 214.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tThe trial which has been going on for almost eight years before the Higher Court in Smederevo has been attracting public attention in Serbia because of both its excessive length and the number of defendants. Charges in the so-called \u201cIndex Affair\u201d were first brought in 2007, amended in 2008, against 89 persons, including Kragujevac Law Faculty professors. They were suspected of selling exams in exchange for cash or luxury items such as whiskey or perfumes.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tEight years on, there is no judgment in sight, hearings have been adjourned several times, and the case against almost half the defendants was dropped due to the lapse of the statute of limitations.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tIn the Second Basic Court in Belgrade, the majority of pending cases older than 10 years pertain to aggravated larceny and robbery.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tJudge Dejan Gari\u0107<\/strong>, president of the Court\u2019s Criminal Chamber, explained that the years-long duration of trial proceedings was often down to multiple suspects and injured parties in a single case, going on to say that it was not always possible to bring them all together for a trial hearing.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cThe biggest problem is that we cannot find them at all at their registered addresses, hence we cannot take any other measures,\u201d said Gari\u0107, adding that the trial would not proceed until after the suspects were tracked down.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tGari\u0107 explained that checking addresses, which often entailed a flurry of correspondence with the police, might well drag on for over a month. Therefore, it would be a good thing, he said, to have some sort of a streamlined system whereby the courts could check themselves if a suspect was serving a sentence or what his address was.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tDefence counsels also fail to attend the trial. They are entitled to do so under the law, but they must notify the court about the reasons for non-attendance.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tIvana Rami\u0107<\/strong>, a judge and Belgrade First Basic Court spokesperson, said such a right was being abused once in a while by defence counsels, at times with the intent to exceed the statute of limitations, particularly in cases with many suspects and lawyers involved.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tAt times lengthy trials render meaningless the right to damages and presumption of innocence, she added, which may lead to a loss of trust in the judiciary.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tPresident of the Judges\u2019 Association of Serbia Dragana Boljevi\u0107<\/strong> said judges had an excessive workload, and therefore, it would be hard to expect of a judge with a backlog of 250 or 300 cases to schedule more than three or four trial hearings per case a year.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cMost often a judge is overburdened and has not had the time to prepare the case in question,\u201d said Boljevi\u0107. \u201cThe judge is not quite sure what to do in a given case and at times he gets frightened by the gravity of the issue at hand so he postpones it a bit, just like any other person would procrastinate if it\u2019s something really hard. It may seem terribly stupid to do so, but it happens because, after all, judges are also just humans.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\t\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\t\"\"<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Trial of Slobodan Milo\u0161evi\u0107\u2019s wife and another ten persons suspected of alleged abuse of public office for allocation of apartments is just one out of 583 criminal court proceedings which have gone on for over a decade and another 2,188 trials extending over a period of five years before Serbia\u2019s criminal courts. Default of appearance by witnesses, adjournment of hearings, years-long length and lapse of the statute of limitations have plagued many trials.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1337,"featured_media":16522,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1596,1492],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-19985","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-court-and-prosecution","category-investigative-stories","ciTrackContent"],"acf":[],"featured_image_url":"https:\/\/www.cins.rs\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/1466692729~~Naslovna-Ilustracija.png","author_additional":null,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cins.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19985","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cins.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cins.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cins.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1337"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cins.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=19985"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.cins.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19985\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":22288,"href":"https:\/\/www.cins.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19985\/revisions\/22288"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cins.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/16522"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cins.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=19985"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cins.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=19985"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cins.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=19985"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}