Deputy Parliament Speaker Antonio Miloshoski discussed the state of the country’s judicial system during an appearance on the Dnevnik news program on Alsat TV. He highlighted the Supreme Court as a key player and pointed to cases of high public interest, according to a statement from VMRO-DPMNE, which MIA is publishing in full.
“The judiciary cannot be evaluated solely based on the laws enacted by the Assembly. The Government, the Assembly, the Public Prosecutor’s Office, and the judges all play a role—it is an interconnected system. Regarding the Assembly, I believe we have passed quite good laws that improve conditions within the judiciary. I also see that the Government is making efforts in this area. However, I must note that there are certain actors—perhaps specific individuals within the judiciary—who are undermining these established standards,” said Miloshoski.
He identified the Supreme Court as a significant actor, suggesting that the manner in which certain judges conduct their rulings may need to be re-examined.
“There are two cases of high public interest: the ‘Laskarci’/’Durmo Tours’ case, and the case concerning the ‘Modular Hospital’.” In these two cases, the executive branch, the Ministry of Interior, the Public Prosecutor’s Office, and many other stakeholders invested significant effort to secure evidence—given that these involved serious lapses resulting in a tragic event—yet the Supreme Court, led by President Fidani, ultimately decided to overturn the verdicts and remand the cases back to the Court of Appeals, and subsequently to the court of first instance, for a retrial. Therefore, in my view, beyond the accountability of an MP, a minister, a prime minister, or a mayor regarding the state of the judiciary, the public should also demand accountability from specific judges. If the Prime Minister, Minister Toshkovski, and Minister Shashivari are able to provide transparent answers to the public regarding the situation in the judiciary, then the President of the Supreme Court should likewise be able to provide answers as to whether the rule of law is the guiding principle of his work.
