1. Does the prosecution service in your country work strategically with ensuring quality in the work of prosecutors? If yes, how is that done?
It is definitely done. Expert supervision over the work of the District State Prosecutor’s Offices, which includes the Specialised State Prosecutor’s Office, is carried out by the Office of the State Prosecutor General through the general, partial or individual expert review of their work. The files may be inspected only by supreme or higher state prosecutors. The lawfulness and timeliness of work, the viability of the procedural powers and possibilities, and the regularity of expert decisions with respect to the established prosecution policy and issued general instructions are reviewed and assessed within the framework of expert supervision. The detected deficiencies or errors are explained by addressing concrete examples, that are also presented during regular expert trainings for State Prosecutors. Otherwise, the quality of the work of prosecutors is also provided by issuing instructions, approved by college of the Criminal Affairs Department at the Office of the State Prosecutor General.
2. Which criteria are considered crucial in your country for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors: their independence, impartiality, human and material resources, conditions of work etc.? Please briefly describe.
A state prosecutor shall be self-dependent and bound to the Constitution and statute in performing his state prosecutorial service. Pursuant to the Constitution, a state prosecutor shall also be bound by the general principles of international law and ratified and published international treaties. The crucial criteria for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors remains the fact that decisions made by the state prosecutor shall not be interfered with in concret cases, except by way of general instructions and the assigning of a case in the manner stipulated by theState Prosecutor's Office Act. A state prosecutor who believes that his self-dependence has been violated may request the State Prosecutorial Council to deal with the violation. If the State Prosecutorial Council concludes that the request is justified, it may remedy the violation or request that it be remedied and make its conclusion public as appropriate.
3. Are there any indicators, formal or informal, used in your country in order to assess the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors, for example, the number of cases considered, the length of the consideration, the complexity of the cases considered etc.? Please briefly describe.
The quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors is assessed by the evaluation on the state prosecutorial service. The quality criteria for performance assessment of state prosecutors were adopted by the State Prosecutorial Council. The object of assessment are:
1. work capabilities and expert knowledge,
2. personal characteristics,
3. social skills,
4. leadership qualifications.
Also timely performance of prosecutor’s duties is considered. State prosecutor's duty is to perform all procedural acts without delay, as a rule in 90 days, along with the order of assigned case-load. With regards to the number of assigned matters (cases) there are considered all prosecutorial decisions and attendances on hearings which are compared to other State Prosecutors from the same department or Proseturor’s Office. When prosecutor resolves more demanding matters, his or her work in compared to prosecutors, resolving comparable matters.
4. Is there a formal or informal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors, how often it is evaluated, by whom, and with what consequences? Do the prosecutors have the right to raise formal or informal objections to the results of the evaluation and to its consequences?
The State Prosecutorial Council prepares the evaluations on the state prosecutorial
service for state prosecutors once every three years because every three years the prosecutor has the right to promotion. Before that the evaluation can be prepared by order of the State Prosecutor General, head of district state prosecutor’s office or prosecutor himself or herself. In first three years of performing state prosecutorial service the evaluation has to be prepared yearly.
By evaluating the state prosecutorial service for state prosecutor the State Prosecutorial Council assesses that state prosecutor:
1. is unsuitable for the state prosecutorial service;
2. does not fulfil the criteria for promotion;
3. fulfils the criteria for promotion;
4. fulfils the criteria for expeditious promotion;
5. fulfils the criteria for exceptional promotion for appointment to the higher title of state prosecutor
No appeal shall be permitted against the evaluation on the state prosecutorial service, but the administrative dispute is allowed.
5. As regards the fight against organised crime and terrorism, are there any specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for prosecutors in your country in order to:
- facilitate their work?
- evaluate their work?
There are no specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for fight against organised crime and terrorism for those cases which are in competences of the Districts State Prosecution Offices. However, in demanding major cases discontinued workload and appointment of trainee in order to offer assistance are intended.
State Prosecution Act provides real jurisdiction for dealing with those types of crime to the Specialized Prosecution Office. The criteria for assessment of the work of prosecutors in this institution are different as for the others.
6. Are there in your country recent legislative reforms to fight more effectively against organised crime and terrorism and how are these reforms seen in relation to the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors? Please briefly describe.
There were no recent legislative activities in field of organised crime and terrorism that would relate to state prosecutor's service. Our legislation has been assessed by different international organization. For the time being there is no need for new legal provision. Some possibilities are under consideration (criminal offences committed by foreign fighters).
7. Do you consider that current international conventions, as well as international organisations, like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, are sufficient to effectively fight against organised crime and terrorism?
We consider mentioned legislation and the work of these institutions as sufficient.
8. What are the major challenges in your country as regards the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors and, in particular, their fight against organised crime and terrorism?
As regard on quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors the major challenge is introduction and the use of the new information system for register and possibility for analyzing the cases and the work of prosecutors in all phases of procedure.
For the fight against organized crime and terrorism the knowledge and information are of the great importance . We will try to organize and to participate the seminars and other forms of trainings for prosecutors and follow developments of these patterns of crime on domestic and international level.