By: Petra Janša
The current political events reminded me of the following thought: “Woe to the country where the judiciary is not at the proper level! In any country, you may have a poor police force and a harsh regime, but if you have a court of law that stands at the necessary level, you also have security for your life, honour, and property. If you do not have a court, you have nothing.”
These words were spoken by Tripko Žugić, a well-known law graduate and judge in the Kingdom of Yugoslavia. Žugić was also part of the parliamentary minority that, during the post-war Yugoslavia, opposed – albeit unsuccessfully – the institution of lay judges (judges without legal education!) during the adoption of the Law on the Organisation of People’s Courts by the Provisional People’s Assembly.
This law allowed not only jurors and professional judges to perform judicial functions but also individuals without any formal education. This was not intended to be an exception but rather the rule. Such an arrangement was advocated by the then parliamentary majority, represented by Miloš Žanko, Frane Frol, Miloš Minić, Vladimir Simić, and Edvard Kardelj. According to Minić, judges could also be legally trained, but only if they were “unconditionally loyal”. If the choice was between uneducated but loyal laypeople and educated lawyers who were not loyal, the absolute preference had to be given to laypeople. He stated: “… Let us elect laypeople to our courts where there are no professionals. Our state will gradually provide all the opportunities for these laypeople – loyal to the people and the achievements of the National Liberation Struggle – to acquire legal education.”
This can be read in the book by Roman Ferjančič and Dr Lovro Šturm, titled “Brezpravje. Slovensko pravosodje po letu 1945” (“Lawlessness. The Slovenian Judiciary After 1945”), where, unfortunately, the parallels with the current state of the judiciary become evident as one reads.