REACTION OF WOMEN’S RIGHTS CENTER IN RESPECT OF FAILURE TO EXCEPT BASIC STATE PROSECUTOR IN BERANE FROM A CASE OF VIOLENCE FOR WHICH MUHAMED RAMUSOVIC IS ACCUSED
SUPREME STATE PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE
Mr. Ivica Stankovic, acting Supreme State Prosecutor
Dear Mr. Stankovic,
Today at the Basic Court in Berane, we attended a hearing in a case in which Muhamed Ramusovic was charged with violent behavior and serious bodily harm.
It is incomprehensible that, after serious complaints about Basic State Prosecutor’s Office’s in Berane treatment of the injured party, Basic State Prosecutor Gorica Golubovic was not excepted from this case, but still appeared today as a representative of the prosecution, which is why at the hearing today the attorney for the injured party, who was hired by the Women’s Rights Center, requested the exclusion of the Basic State Prosecutor Gorica Golubovic, as well as all prosecutors of Basic State Prosecutor’s Office in Berane. You informed us on December 11th 2019 that The Commission for Review of Complaints against the Work of State Prosecutors and Heads of State Prosecutor’s Offices has not yet taken a decision in this case, so we believe that the case should have been assigned to another Basic State Prosecutor from this Prosecutor’s Office until all the facts stated by the injured party in the complaint have been established. We delivered to you the complaint on December 15th 2019. All the facts from the complaint were also cited at today’s main hearing.
In addition, the head of the High State Prosecutor’s Office in Bijelo Polje, Mirko Bulatovic, in his statement to the media stated that „by examining the files formed on the occasion of criminal responsibility of Muhamed Ramusovic, and based on a detailed statement given in the interview and written by the Prosecutor General Gorica Golubovic, there is no evidence to suggest the truth of the injured party’s statement that Jelena Krstic claims that her prosecutor asked her to forgive her attacker and to deny the statements made earlier“. He also states that he „informed the acting Supreme State Prosecutor Ivica Stankovic about his decision“. We believe that a layman may conclude that there was no expectation that evidence of inappropriate Basic State Prosecutor treatment would be found in the case files and it should be noted that prior to issuing such an opinion, the head of the High State Prosecutor’s Office in Bijelo Polje did not interview the injured party, which was crucial for the consideration of all aspects of this case and understanding of the feelings of vulnerability damaged during the interrogation by Basic State Prosecutor, Gorica Golubovic and the defendant’s lawyer. We therefore consider that the conduct of the High State Prosecutor’s Office in Bijelo Polje did not properly serve to establish the true facts of this case, but solely to the satisfaction of the form after your urgency, and therefore we expect your urgent reaction to prevent current practices that allow prosecutors to avoid liability in such cases.
NGO Women’s Rights Center