Request for protest walk denied and appeal filed

The decision prohibits the holding of a public gathering in motion registered for the day 10.09.2020. Years. In the explanation of the challenged decision, the first-instance body states that it performed the “procedure for verifying the merits of the request” and that it accordingly determined that the appellant was a member of the group “Justice for David” and that she participated in unreported rallies where public order was disturbed. violated the provisions of the Public Assembly Act and committed criminal offenses. The appellant points out that these are extremely flat conclusions on the basis of which a lawful decision cannot be based, and also for the following reasons:

– the first-instance body did not state in what way it determined that the appellant was allegedly a member of the “Justice for David” group, just as it did not state the reason why eventual membership or membership in a “group” (first instance body does not explain what group it is) ) was the basis for the ban

– the first instance body did not specify what “member of the group” means or what group of citizens it is, considering that the group “Justice for David” as they point out in public does not have the character of an association of citizens or any other group of citizens as defined by law

– the first instance body does not explain in what way it determined that the appellant participated in previous rallies, and in which rallies because it absolutely did not define the date or place where it “determined” that the appellant was and thus jeopardized the merits of his request and on what his decision on the submitted application

– the applicant, grossly violating the presumption of innocence, points out that certain misdemeanor and criminal acts took place, without mentioning any final criminal judgment or final decision from the misdemeanor procedure.

This “verification” of the merits of the request leads to the indisputable conclusion that the first instance body intended to find any reasons, even if they were incorrect and flat, to prohibit the requested peaceful assembly, and not to check the merits of the request and what way to decide in its entirety is a violation of the Law on General Administrative Procedure, the Law on Public Assemblies and the Constitution of the RS, which guarantees this right.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.