Disciplinary Commission Returns Complaint Against Judge Branko Perić for Revision, Next Hearing on November 7

(Patria) - The first-instance disciplinary commission returned the complaint to the Office of the Disciplinary Prosecutor for revision due to a identified omission of the factual description of the offense in one of the points related to untimely and inefficient action in rendering a decision, which was pointed out by the defendant Branko Perić, a judge of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Perić pointed out to the Commission the omission in the second point of the complaint, which did not include factual descriptions of the disciplinary offense.

“We order the Office of the Disciplinary Prosecutor to submit a revised complaint against the defendant Branko Perić within eight days regarding the second point of the complaint, where they will state the factual description of the disciplinary offense, i.e., the actions,” said the chairperson of the Disciplinary Commission, Aleksandra Obradović.

After the first-instance verdict in the “Respirators” case in April this year, when Perić had a separate legal opinion, the ODP initiated a case against him ex officio.

Disciplinary Prosecutor Asmir Baćevac, presenting the disciplinary complaint, said that the Office filed the complaint due to “rendering decisions that clearly violate the law or persistent and unjustified violation of procedural rules” and “unjustified delay in drafting decisions or in other actions related to performing the duties of a judge or any other repeated disregard of judicial duties.”

“On April 5, 2023, Branko Perić – as the presiding judge of the Trial Panel in a case before the Court of BiH, contrary to the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code – presented a separate legal opinion at the hearing,” said Baćevac.

He also added that Perić, through the case management system (CMS), requested that the separate legal opinion be delivered to the parties, thereby violating the law on the High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council (HJPC), i.e., rendering a decision that clearly violates the law, or persistently and unjustifiably violating procedural rules.

The defendant Perić said that the disciplinary offenses alleged against him in the complaint do not include a separate legal opinion in their content, which is why he expressed doubt that he can be disciplinarily charged for it.

“I announced that the verdict was reached by a majority decision of two members of the Panel and provided an explanation of the separate opinion. Previously, all three members unanimously decided on such a method of announcing the verdict,” he said.

Baćevac said that the second point of the complaint charges him with unjustified delay in drafting decisions due to inefficient and untimely undertaking of official actions, thereby failing to conclude the procedure for returning property gained through a criminal act before the legal deadline for revoking a suspended sentence.

Perić, in his response to the complaint, did not wish to elaborate further, emphasizing that the offense from that point is not factually described, which the Disciplinary Commission accepted, ordering the ODP to revise the second point of the complaint and submit it to the Commission within eight days.

The third point of the complaint charges Perić, due to a statement in which he claims that “the prosecutorial-media mafia wants to criminally sanction him for expressing an opinion,” with behavior that constitutes a serious violation of official duty, or calls into question public trust in the impartiality and credibility of the judiciary.

“I do not dispute that I provided a statement to the media in which I used the phrase ‘prosecutorial-media mafia.’ I did so after I became convinced that a series of media attacks against me stem from a planned scheme by some prosecutors of the Prosecutor's Office of BiH and political structures using ‘Dnevni avaz’ as a means of media pressure,” said Judge Perić.

He explained that this media outlet, a day before the verdict in the “Respirators” case, published information about the verdict and the separate opinion, which is why the members of the Trial Panel agreed that the verdict announcement would be held in a way that he presents the separate opinion, thereby attempting to restore the integrity of the judiciary.

Perić also warned about problems with information leaks from judicial institutions to the media, which undermines public trust and the integrity of institutions.

The Disciplinary Commission, in its decision on the revision of the complaint, ordered that the parties not propose witnesses until the next hearing, which is scheduled for November 7, reports Detektor.