Function of Croatian Judiciary Facing Serious Problems Once Again

November the 1st, 2026 – The very function of the Croatian judiciary is facing serious problems yet again due to some judges refusing to participate in proceedings if they’re recorded. President of the Constitutional Court Frane Staničić stated that the Court will function with great difficulty due to the decision of some judges not to participate in sessions that are audio-recorded. Index reports that in an interview for RTL Danas he revealed that he is extremely sorry that individual judges, as he believes, have stopped providing protection to citizens within the judiciary system. These are judges Andrej Abramović, Sanja Bezbradica Jelavić and Lovorka Kušan, who oppose the way in which the audio recording of sessions was introduced. They claim that no appropriate decision of the Court was adopted and refuse to participate in sessions which, in their opinion, are being recorded unlawfully. “we really tried hard to come to an agreement” Staničić said that the judges during the past year invested great effort so that the Constitutional Court would function normally and protect the rights of citizens. As an example he cited decisions on politically sensitive laws, among which are the Act on Building Management and the Act on Local Taxes. He emphasised that the decisions on those laws were adopted by a large majority, with only one or two votes against. He added that the number of separate opinions has significantly decreased, which according to his interpretation shows that the judges sought to reach agreement. “Unfortunately, due to the refusal of certain colleagues to participate in the work of the constitutional court bodies because of the introduced audio recording, the system will function with great difficulty,” Staničić said. When asked why he introduced recording without a decision of all the judges, Staničić confirmed that there was no formal decision of the Constitutional Court as a collegial body. He claims, however, that there was an informal agreement and that all judges were familiar with the procurement and installation of the equipment. “I warned the judges several times that we would buy the system, that we had procured it, installed it and that we were testing it. At the session on the 6th of October, which was also recorded, I said in front of everyone that from that day, in accordance with the agreement, the sessions are being recorded. No one reacted to that,” he explained. He also commented on the appearance of judge Andrej Abramović, who had been a guest on RTL the day before. Staničić believes that Abramović should have pointed out his disagreement before the conflict among the judges arose because of the recording. the introduction of audio recording doesn’t require the permission of all judges “He said in your programme that he practically knew that recording was taking place, or rather that recording would be introduced, but that I am neither his father nor mother, so he would not warn me that something is not good,” Staničić said. “I’d like to openly ask the public to judge – is it in accordance with the role of a Constitutional Court judge that if he considers that something is not good, he collegially warns the President of the Court that he considers that this should not be done, or that he remains silent and then on the basis of his unexpressed disagreement creates this problem that has now occurred?” he added. Staničić claims that he did not need a special decision of all the judges to introduce audio recording because as President he has the authority to decide on the manner of establishing the minutes. As the main reason for introducing recording he cited earlier disagreements about the content of the minutes of the sessions. “I introduced audio recording for a simple reason: we had a series of problems with establishing the authenticity of the minutes. It happened that colleagues claim that something stands in the minutes that should not stand and vice versa,” he explained. As a particularly problematic case he cited the events from May of this year, when the judges discussed the composition of the panels of the Constitutional Court. According to his words, it was precisely the judges who now oppose the recording who at that time contested the minutes. “The judges who today contest the audio recording at that time contested the minutes that were signed by two minute-takers and whose accuracy was confirmed by five judges. In such circumstances there is no other way to ensure an authentic record that no one will be able to contest,” Staničić said. should some sessions be completely open to the public? The President of the Constitutional Court believes that audio recording should contribute to transparency and the possibility of verifying what was said at the sessions. He also announced that he wants to open a discussion on the possibility that part of the sessions of the Constitutional Court will in future be accessible to the public. “I personally believe that the Court should be more open to the public in general. I can announce that I will initiate a serious discussion at the Constitutional Court on the Court becoming more open, that perhaps even part of the sessions will be public,” he stated. He emphasised that the main task of the Constitutional Court is the protection of citizens’ rights, but he believes that due to the current conflict that task has fallen into the background. He also rejected claims that the recordings of the sessions are his private documentation. “This is official documentation created in official premises, with official equipment, and is stored on the official servers and information system of the Constitutional Court,” he said. Staničić claims that every judge can access the recordings and listen to them. He rejected the claim of judge Abramović that access was denied to someone, but at the same time emphasised that a distinction must be made between the possibility of listening and obtaining one’s own copy of the recording. “I received a request for a copy of the recording. Here a distinction must be made between the possibility of listening, which is absolutely not disputed, and the question of copies. I replied only to the colleague who requested it that her request will be considered in terms of scope and possibilities. Therefore, such a request has by no means been rejected,” he stated. no agreement has been reached at all In order to resolve the dispute, Staničić proposed the establishment of a working group that would prepare rules on audio recording. It would include him, the Secretary General of the Constitutional Court and one of the judges who oppose the recording. “Unfortunately, I did not receive a positive answer because participation in the working group is conditioned on the cessation of audio recording. I have already explained that this is impossible, because it is the only way in which I can ensure authenticity,” he said. Staničić stated that one of the three judges who opposed the recording nevertheless participated in a session, although she retained her opposition. He believes that the remaining two judges could have done the same so that the work of the Court would not be hindered. “Unfortunately, the other two judges did not want to follow that example. They could have retained their opposition, but we want to protect citizens. However, they chose the opposite – not to protect the rights of citizens, but to deepen the conflict, which is unnecessary,” he said. a new session has been announced for november the 13th The President of the Constitutional Court said that he has no mechanisms by which he could force the judges to participate in the work. Nevertheless, he hopes that everyone will accept the responsibility they have towards citizens and enable the continuation of regular work. He announced that he will schedule a new session as soon as the two judges who oppose the recording return from an official trip, which he expects to take place on or around the 13th of November. In the meantime the question remains open whether an agreement will be reached on the manner of recording the sessions. Staničić also said that the Constitutional Court has received requests from GONG, the media and citizens for access to the audio recordings. He emphasised that this is sensitive documentation that may contain secret data and that he cannot make it public on his own. Due to the great public interest he announced that he will seek the consent of all constitutional judges for the publication of the recordings. If he obtains it, he is ready to publish them, and if someone opposes it, he announced that he will publicly say who was against. “This is a very sensitive issue and secret data that I cannot just give out. However, given the extreme importance of the issue and the interest of the public, I will propose and seek a consensus of all judges that the recordings be given to the public. If a consensus is reached, I will give the recordings. If it is not reached, if even one judge is against, I will publicly announce which judges were against it,” Staničić concluded. The post Function of Croatian Judiciary Facing Serious Problems Once Again appeared first on Total Croatia .