Columbia University using corrupt idiotic Macedonian judges as case studies


Columbia University will hold lectures on Macedonian judge Dobrila Kacarska as an example of how a Court procedure should not be led.

One of the most prestigious universities in the world published on its official website the case in which judge Dobrila Kacarska unconstitutionally punished lawyers in the April 27 case with high fines worth thousands of euros and removed them from the trial, leaving the defendants without defenders.

The case is published in the section on Global Freedom of Expression, on the official website of Columbia University. There they explain the decision of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Macedonia to punish all lawyers with a fine of 1000 Euros, later reduced to 500 Euros by the Appeal Court.

Judge Kacarska at a hearing on October 16, 2018 where “a protected witness” was questioned whose trial was moved to a different much smaller Court, decided to punish the lawyers who stood upright in the courtroom protesting the inhumane conditions in the tiny courtroom unsuitable for the lawyers in such an important case, especially when cross-examining a protected witness.

Due to the inappropriate working conditions for the lawyers and the lack of desks in front of them so that they could properly follow the testimony of the protected witness in the small hall, they requested that the hearing be postponed until the equipment in the new Criminal Court facility was repaired, which was unacceptable for Judge Kacarska for unclear reasons.

Kacarska became known as a judge who in this case held hearings “as on a norm”, 4 times a week and which lasted 10, 12 and even 14 hours a day. According to some political analysts, the purpose of such a proceeding by Kacarska, was to proceed as swiftly as possible in this case so that the indicted deputies could be “pressured” to vote for the change of the Constitutional name of the Republic of Macedonia.

Two of the fined lawyers, Pavlina Zefic and Pance Toskovski filed a complaint to the Constitutional Court against the Criminal and Appeals Court decisions. The Constitutional Court in September quashed the Criminal and Appeals Courts’ decisions that fined the lawyers in the “April 27” case.

The Constitutional Court found that there was a violation of the freedom of opinion and public expression of the opinion of the lawyers.