Deputies Assembly of Serbia who participated in the incidents in the parliamentary hall on Tuesday can be prosecuted if their parliamentary immunity is revoked, which is dealt with by the Committee for Administrative-Budgetary and Mandate-Immunity Issues, after which plaintiff can initiate proceedings for some acts, according to "Vremena" interlocutors.
The first day of this year's first session of the Assembly was marked by chaos, a fight between deputies, smoke bombs and torches brought in by opposition deputies, and the fire extinguisher was activated.
They could be charged with violent behavior
Lawyer Stefan Ćorda tells "Vreme" that parliamentary immunity also applies to criminal offenses for which a prison sentence can be imposed and that thanks to it, parliamentarians have immunity from detention and investigation.
"Since it was announced that no amount of immunity will save them from the disturbances that took place in the parliamentary hall, it can be concluded that the parliamentary Committee for Administrative-Budgetary and Mandate-Immunity will remove their immunity." "The MPs could be accused of violent behavior, because they behaved like fans, throwing smoke bombs and lighting torches, as if they were at a game," says Ćorda.
He notes that the MPs "will of course defend that they did it in order to fight for freedom of speech, opinion and expression".
"If we don't go into the background of who could have organized and staged it, what we saw is inappropriate behavior and he will certainly suffer some sanctions, if nothing else in terms of the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly, in that the MPs will be excluded from the session and removed for some time. These will be either criminal acts or serious violations of the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly due to indiscipline and disrespect, for which the sanctions are always removal or exclusion," says Ćorda.
When parliamentary immunity protects
He emphasizes that parliamentary immunity serves to protect the parliamentarian from criminal prosecution for the spoken words and actions he commits while performing his duties and service. This specifically means that a member of parliament cannot be prosecuted if he insults someone and calls him a thief in a parliamentary debate.
"What was done on Tuesday in the assembly hall will certainly be sanctioned, only if so many deputies are thrown out of the hall, the question is whether there will be a quorum and how the decisions will be made," concludes Ćorda.
First, determine the responsibility of the President of the Assembly of Serbia
And lawyer Božo Prelevic says that MPs could be held responsible if their immunity is revoked. However, the behavior of the President of the Serbian Parliament, Ana Brnabić, should be analyzed first.
"She could be criminally prosecuted because at the previous session of the Assembly, invalid laws were voted against the law, that is, they were not passed in a legal form, and she is responsible for that." In addition, there is also the way in which she started the session of the Serbian Parliament on Tuesday without noting the resignation of Prime Minister Vučević, which is also an abuse of office," says Prelevic.
And when it comes to injuries that may have occurred in the assembly hall, it was necessary to determine who caused them and with what.
"We can also talk about some kind of endangerment of health, because fire extinguishers contain many toxic substances and the use of those means could be covered by some actions of the prosecution, and we can also talk about harming the reputation of the country." "I think that smoke bombs, unlike fire extinguishers, do not contain toxic substances and cannot endanger health," says Prelevic.
The abolition of immunity will turn into a political struggle
He points out that the way in which Brnabić conducted the session is "deeply illegal and contrary to the Constitution".
She adds that regarding the reaction of the opposition - because the Democratic Party boycotted the session - it would be possible to determine the responsibility of each of them for individual acts if the MPs' immunity were revoked.
"The eventual abolition of immunity is a very complex matter that will turn into politics, because the competent committee will assess by majority whether the immunity of MPs should be removed, and unfortunately the members of that committee are not independent, but rather party-oriented," says Prelevic.
He emphasizes that it is "interesting" that the session was not interrupted and that the deputies did not decide to leave the hall when the incidents began, and adds that this is also the responsibility of the President of the Serbian Parliament, Ana Brnabić.
"If the opposition did it in order to prevent the Serbian Parliament from making all the citizens of this country financially miserable for the Expo, then the big question is whether it had another possibility to do it." That is the magnifying glass through which the behavior of the opposition should be appreciated. It is a reflection of the country where the government introduced violence in a big way," says Prelevic.
What could an "incompetent president" do?
He points out that the reaction of the "incompetent president of the state" to the events in the parliament could affect the protest announced for March 15, and that the expediency of the opposition's move in the parliament hall on Tuesday will be seen from that point of view.
"I find it most surprising that, despite all the controls, things that were introduced on this occasion can be brought into the parliament, after individual MPs announced an 'unusual' session of the Assembly. I am afraid that the incompetent president of Serbia could declare some kind of state of emergency, although Serbia is certainly in a state of emergency, but that he could also make it official and ban protests. However, that would be a move in the opposite direction, because it would not essentially ban protests, but would have to lead to a conflict between people who want to protest and those who should, by law, prevent them," concludes Prelevic.
