THE FOLLOWING IS THE SPEECH OF THE SPEAKER OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA IN ITS ENTIRETY:

"Dear representatives of judicial institutions,

Your Excellencies,

I is my pleasure to greet you to our fifth public hearing on the changes to the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia. Thank you for your interest in this process and I hope you are ready to share ideas, comments and suggestions with us, because the purpose of this form of public discussion is precisely that - to jointly find the best solutions to incorporate into our Constitution.

You know that the procedure Constitutional amendment is complex and requires the consent in practically all branches of government - legislative, executive and judicial, and finally the confirmation of the proposed changes by referendum. But the participation of the general public in the preparation of constitutional changes is no less important than the institutional procedure, because that is the only guarantee that we will reach a solution suitable for our democratic development and compliant with our obligations arising from the EU membership negotiations.

I would like to inform you that we have held four rounds of public hearings in the National Assembly so far, attended, besides the MPs, by representatives of the judiciary, bar associations, universities, as well as the civil sector dealing with the rule of law. We have had excellent discussions with a very wide circle of participants and all this confirms that by organizing this form of public dialogue we have acted appropriately, because these conversations will undoubtedly result in good and useful solutions for the work ahead.

Even after today's discussion, we will continue to discuss constitutional changes in the later stages of the Constitutional amendment procedure. Given that today’s discussion is attended by representatives of the European Union, Council of Europe, OSCE, as well as representatives of embassies of several countries, I would ask that we hear all suggestions and experiences of similar procedures in other countries, because we are open to all proposals that can contribute to making our constitutional framework more modern and fair.

I would like to remind you that we will have a plenary session here, in the National Assembly on 8 June, dedicated to the constitutional changes, where the MPs will rule on our Committee on Constitutional and Legislative Issues proposal to change the Constitution, after which the same Committee will determine the specific text of the constitutional changes, i.e. amendments, which the National Assembly will rule on again in the plenum. This will be followed by a referendum in which the citizens will give the final word on these proposals. Like I said at the last public hearing, a new law on referendums, which should have been passed in 2008, also needs to be adopted in the meantime.

I would also like to remind you that the subject of our work are those provisions of the Constitution that concern the judiciary, i.e. the manner of electing holders of judicial office, and that other constitutional provisions will not be discussed. We believe that this is an extremely important part of the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia and that in the long run, as a state, we have shown readiness to harmonise these solutions with European standards, but above all with the need of our society to have an even more democratic judicial system and even better protection of all our citizens before the law.

In this regard, I am convinced that today's discussion will be an important step in that direction, and the National Assembly and I, as its Speaker, will be fully open to all of your initiatives, today or at a later stage in the process of Constitutional amendment.

What appears as a paradox is that the National Assembly is most in favor of changing the Constitution, and those concerned, i.e. judges and prosecutors, do not express much support. The paradox is that many political parties that say they are pro-European, are also opposed to changing the Constitution. That is why my question addressed to you, representatives of the diplomatic corps, was, whether what we are doing is in line with, among other things, your recommendations? This is not the domain of political struggle, this is the domain of the story of independence of the judiciary. I say this because I would not like this story to turn into a relation of government-opposition, parties of one or the other orientation, or to have what we are doing eventually criticised, and if it is done at your recommendation, it would be important to hear your position.

I wish you successful work and thank you once again for responding to our invitation,

Thank you!