Serbia’s security system should be regulated in the Constitution

{image1}

The security system should be an integral part of the Constitution because the security of the state and citizens is a public good. This creates a barrier for potential misuse by political decision makers, it was concluded at the discussion organized by the Belgrade Center for Security Policy (BCSP) on February 13, 2018 in Media Center in Belgrade.

{image2} The security system in Serbia’s Constitution is modestly regulated, said Bogoljub Milosavljevic, professor at the Union University’s Faculty of Law.

“A whole section of the Constitution should be devoted to the security sector, which will determine who commands, manages and is responsible for the security sector, what are the principles of organization and who executes democratic civilian control,” Milosavljevic stressed.

{image3}The responsibility of the policy makers is the pillar for establishing the security system, said the chairman of the board of BCSP Miroslav Hadzic.

“It is necessary to regulate in the Constitution the areas of responsibility of those who provide security services, including responsibility for the professional readiness of the army and responsibility to the Assembly or other bodies,” Hadzic said.

Hadzic warned of the danger of concentrating power in the hands of individuals or small groups, which is why civilian commanders should be under the democratic civilian control.

National Security Council should be regulated in the Constitution

Milosavljevic reminded that Serbia is one of few countries who have a National Security Council but whose Constitution does not regulate what this body represents.

“It is necessary for the Constitution to regulate the governance and management of the security system and to define the place, position and role of the National Security Council,” Hadzic added.

Examples of good practice

BCSP researcher Jelena Pejic presented examples of constitutional security regulation in the region and beyond which show what can be constitutional substance and work in practice. Pejic stressed that in Serbia, compared with the countries of the region, the issue of democratic civilian control is poorly and sparsely defined.

{image4}”The Constitution of Montenegro not only proclaims democratic civilian control over the military and security services, but parliamentary oversight is also prescribed in accordance with that. Outside of the region, a good example is the Republic of South Africa, which like Serbia has an authoritarian heritage that it overcame in the nineties. In the South African case, subordination to legitimately elected government officials exists not only in principle, but certain bodies in charge of controlling specific actors and parliamentary oversight in special committees with multi-party composition are also prescribed.There is a unique constitutional solution in Romania, where the Supreme National Defense Council reports to the Parliament. Interesting examples of certain segments of democratic civilian controlare found in the constitutions of Turkey, Chile and Macedonia. Even after the constitutional changes in 2017 in Turkey, the responsibility of the president was arranged so that he responds to the parliament in the capacity of the commander of the armed forces. In the case of Chile, responsibility of ministers, generals and admirals is also prescribed. The Macedonian Constitution requires that the heads of the Ministry of Defense and the Ministry of Interior be civilians who have had that status for at least 3 years,” Pejic explained.

It is important that the proclamation does not remain in principle only, but that the legislators also be obligated to regulate this matter through lower acts, concluded Pejic.

 

The goal of the panel discussion is to point to key gaps in the constitutional regulation in the area of security, as well as to offer suggestions on how to overcome them. Although the professional community has pointed from the start to deficiencies in the constitutional text and the process of its adoption, Serbian Government has not until recently initiated constitutional reforms, but only in the judicial sector, pressured by the progress line of Serbian accession negotiations with the European Union, and ignoring other areas that need constitutional change. In this way BCSP aims to contribute to a wider debate on what constitution citizens of Serbia need and what place should the security system take therein.