Only one judicial office holder was sanctioned with dismissal from duty last year, as evident from the report of the Office of the Disciplinary Counsel (ODC).
Judges and prosecutors were issued 27 disciplinary measures for misconduct, with the majority being public reprimands (9), salary reductions (8), and written warnings not publicly disclosed (5). In addition to the aforementioned dismissal, one measure of transfer from the position of deputy chief prosecutor was also imposed.
The reasons for sanctions in two cases were that those responsible did not recuse themselves from cases where a conflict of interest exists, while in seven cases they made decisions that clearly violate the law and procedural rules.
However, the sanctions for these violations are lenient, and the ODC data show that there have been no significant changes in sanctioning misconduct in the judiciary, despite a substantial increase in the number of complaints about the work of judges and prosecutors, which increased by 20% last year. The majority relate to serious allegations of violating the ethical code, which has led to damaging the reputation and integrity of the judiciary.
Nevertheless, out of 1,385 complaints, only 59 were deemed well-founded, and a total of 37 disciplinary proceedings were initiated. These involved 7 prosecutors, 4 heads of judicial institutions, and 28 judges. On the other hand, the time for resolving complaints has been reduced to 183 days, which represents an improvement of 22 days compared to the previous year.
The TI BiH analysis published two years ago showed that salary reduction is the most common disciplinary measure, while dismissals remain an exception and such sanctions remain sporadic. This analysis showed that only 4% of the imposed measures resulted in the dismissal of judges and prosecutors, indicating that the HJPC’s policy is still lenient in terms of the repressive element of sanctions.
A special case is the judicial office holder against whom a sixth disciplinary proceeding was conducted in 2024 – which clearly indicates the existence of recidivism and deficiencies in the prevention system.
The data show that, despite attempts to implement reforms in the judiciary, a system that would guarantee real accountability and integrity of judicial office holders has not yet been established. It is important to note this again in the context of the poor results that the BiH judiciary has in the fight against corruption. Moreover, disciplinary accountability is a key component of judicial independence and efficiency, which is why TI BiH proposed measures that include:
- greater transparency of the disciplinary proceedings and decisions themselves,
- increasing the number and scope of disciplinary measures while introducing a stricter and more consistent penal policy,
- considering models for different procedural arrangements to reduce inappropriate influences,
- strengthening the independence of the Office of the Disciplinary Counsel from the HJPC itself.
.){kind=link}