Zagreb - Ahead of Wednesday's debate on the Supreme Court president's reports on the state of the judiciary for 2022, 2023 and 2024, opposition MPs requested a break, accusing the HDZ of pushing Croatia into a constitutional crisis, while HDZ MPs insisted their party is working to maintain the stability of all institutions.
SDP MP Tonči Restović, explaining the request, said that the HDZ is continuously working to keep a tight grip on the Croatian judiciary.
He emphasised that, in addition to the Supreme Court lacking a president for over a year, the behaviour of HDZ members on the Justice Committee throughout the selection process for the court's head has been disgraceful and unprecedented. He also recalled that the reports for 2022, 2023 and 2024 would not even have been tabled for debate if the SDP had not submitted the necessary signatures.
HDZ MP Nikola Mažar responded by saying the only disgraceful thing is that Restović and his party are "blocking the appointment of Constitutional Court judges over the handball team's reception". "You are bothered by the Croatian people, bothered by the handball players, and are blocking the work of the Constitutional Court," said Mažar.
Dalija Orešković, speaking for the HSS, GLAS and DOSIP group, appealed to deputies to focus the discussion solely on the HDZ's approach to the judiciary, stating that the only person who should answer questions on this is Prime Minister Andrej Plenković, whom she blamed for the current state.
IDS MP Dalibor Paus said that the HDZ and the ruling coalition will claim that the judiciary is functioning, adding that it serves their interests. "They need their own people at the Supreme Court, the State Attorney's Office, and the State Inspectorate, because that's the only way things work for them," he said.
Urša Raukar Gamulin from We Can! argued that Plenković is trying to link unrelated matters -- the appointment of the Supreme Court head and of the Constitutional Court judges. "Croatia is slowly turning into a country with an acting judiciary, because not only have we lacked a Supreme Court head for over a year, but the Zagreb Commercial Court has been without a president for a year and a half," she said.
Ante Kujundžić from the Bridge party questioned the point of debating the Supreme Court reports, pointing to a suspended sentence for a Moroccan man who attacked a Croatian policewoman and wondering who Croatia is trying to curry favour with.
Requesting a break on behalf of the HDZ, Krunoslav Katičić said it was remarkable how easily people with little knowledge of the judiciary speak about it. He added that everyone should be proud of what the judiciary has produced over the past 30 years, adding that he did not see a problem with the HDZ proposal to simultanously fill the top position at the Supreme Court and appoint Constitutional Court judges.
"Dear colleagues, you don't have leaders in four of your largest party branches, but you don't see that as a problem," Katičić told SDP MPs.
This prompted a series of reactions from opposition deputies, who said Katičić had "revealed himself" by comparing the Supreme Court head selection to appointing a party leader, highlighting why citizens lack trust in the judiciary.
SDP deputies repeatedly stressed that the government and HDZ are bringing both the Supreme Court and Constitutional Court into "serious structural disruption and long-term dysfunction."
Ahead of the debate on the Supreme Court reports for 2022, 2023 and 2024, the government had earlier proposed that Parliament only take note of these reports.