A young mother is now being prosecuted by officials who are supposed to protect her

A woman from Podgorica who, for more than a year, has refused to allow her daughter contact with her father, because she suspects he is physically abusing her, due to which she was imprisoned last October by court order, even though she was in the seventh month of a high-risk pregnancy, will now also have to deal with two criminal complaints filed against her by officials in Montenegrin institutions - Judge Jelena Anđelić of the Basic Court in Podgorica and Director of the Center for Social Work in Podgorica Arnesa Đečević.

- It is obvious that criminal complaints are being initiated against me solely because I speak publicly about the work of institutions - she told Portal ETV, convinced that she is being subjected to „institutional pressure“ after she began publicly speaking about the conduct of certain institutions.

RESTRICTION OF PUBLIC SPEECH

She adds that her ex-husband has submitted a request to the court to restrict her right to speak publicly.

- With the explanation that I have a large number of followers on social media. I believe this is a clear attempt to silence me because I am speaking publicly about the proceedings and the work of institutions - she stated firmly.

She adds that the situation in proceedings before the Basic Court in Podgorica is becoming increasingly unusual.

- Judges are recusing themselves, and the latest example is that Judge Jelena Anđelić filed a criminal complaint against me, after which she was recused from the case. This is already the third judge to be recused in the case, in addition to two judges who previously recused themselves due to friendship with my ex-husband - she says.

She is convinced that the criminal complaints filed against her by Anđelić and Đečević are a form of pressure.

- When you have a case in which judges recuse themselves, criminal complaints are filed against a party, and attempts are made to restrict public speech, then it is clear that this is an attempt to silence one person - she emphasizes.

She stresses that she has never revealed the identity of the child nor violated her privacy.

- I speak exclusively about the conduct of institutions and the way the proceedings are being handled - she concluded.

The President of the Basic Court in Podgorica Željka Jovović issued a decision on March 6 to recuse Judge Anđelić from the proceedings involving the Podgorica woman and her ex-husband, after the judge informed the court that she had filed a criminal complaint with the Basic State Prosecutor’s Office due to reasonable suspicion that the woman had committed the criminal offense of obstruction of justice.

THE JUDGE ACCUSES HER OF OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE

Judge Anđelić, as she informed the court president, considers that one of two emails she received from the Podgorica woman on February 26 was „highly questionable and full of qualifications“, which, as she stated, „goes beyond the bounds of what is permissible and appropriate, with evident animosity“ toward her, as well as a personal conviction about her work and „obvious distrust, intolerance, and a form of pressure and threat“.

The decision on the judge’s recusal also cites the disputed part of the woman’s email:

- I absolutely do not place trust in the judge, nor do I believe I can trust a judge who, even if we disregard everything else, ignores the child’s findings, which are clear, and evidently acts in favor of the defendant-plaintiff. At the same time, I emphasize that the entire handling of this case, including the conduct of Judge Jelena Anđelić following this decision, will be subject to further legal action and review both before domestic and international institutions, including proceedings to determine violations of the right to an impartial court and the rights of the minor child to protection. In particular, it will be assessed whether the failure to issue a decision on a temporary measure constituted a failure of the court that led to a violation of the minor child’s rights - this is the part that Judge Anđelić finds problematic, while she dismisses the Podgorica woman’s claims as inaccurate and fabricated.

Judge Anđelić also pointed out that the Podgorica woman had filed an initiative with the Judicial Council of Montenegro to determine her disciplinary and ethical responsibility, as well as a criminal complaint with the Special State Prosecutor’s Office.

In a supplementary statement dated March 4, Judge Anđelić emphasized that she „filed a request for recusal due to the clearly expressed animosity of the plaintiff, evident through all her actions... and especially due to the fact that, as the presiding judge, she filed a criminal complaint against the plaintiff... which by its very nature would call into question her objectivity in further proceedings“.

CONCERNING MESSAGES FROM THE DIRECTOR

The Director of the Center for Social Work, Arnesa Đečević, filed a criminal complaint against the Podgorica woman a few days ago, after the woman published on social media the content of a message that Đečević had sent to a mutual acquaintance.

- You don’t know who she is or what is behind this, if we go public, many people won’t be well - the message from Đečević reads.

Along with publishing this message, the Podgorica woman called on the director of the Center for Social Work to publicly disclose everything she knows about her. Shortly afterward, Đečević filed a criminal complaint.

In February, Portal ETV reported that the expert team of the Center for Social Work in Podgorica had proposed to the court that custody be taken away from the Podgorica woman and that the father assume care of the child, completely ignoring a psychological assessment stating that the child „does not show signs of emotional closeness to the father, but rather perceives him as a threat“.

The team did not take into account the expert opinion of psychologist Radmila Stupar Đurišić, who conducted the assessment by court order last November and was explicit that „any attempt at forced handover could lead to a traumatic reaction and a deterioration of the child’s emotional state“.

By order of Judge Ina Hrković of the Basic Court in Podgorica, under whose decision the Podgorica woman was imprisoned last year, there were two attempts to hand the girl over to her father, both of which she refused, experiencing intense stress.

After her release from prison, the Podgorica woman filed criminal complaints alleging inhumane treatment of her daughter by institutions.