JUSTICE AND JUDICIARY In the complaints to the Protector of Citizens, citizens still indicate to problems with regards to the supervision implemented by the Ministry of Justice over the work of judiciary administration, acting of courts in cases within prescribed deadlines and acting upon complaints and dispositions of citizens. Citizens who use legal remedies stipulated by the Law on Court Organization17 and Court Rules of Procedure18 to express dissatisfaction considering that stipulated supervision mechanisms are not effective and efficient, since frequently in the situations when their complaints are evaluated as founded by competent instances, the measures taken do not result in expected effects. The expectations of citizens with regards to the authorizations of the Ministry of Justice in acting upon complaints to the work of judiciary authorities are frequently unfounded and with no legal grounds, since citizens expect the Ministry, by filing complaints to the Ministry, predominantly to the work of courts, to influence the court proceedings and review court decisions. Citizens also submitted complaints to the Protector of Citizens regarding the work of public enforcement officers, whose work is not in the competence of the Protector of Citizens to control. The most frequent problems indicated by citizens with regards to the work of public enforcement officers referred to the height of the enforcement expenses, especially the Public Enforcement Tariff19, unjustified increase of expenses, as well as problems with regards to the submission of documents in the process of enforcement. Furthermore, complaints referred to the work of the Ministry of Justice and work of the Chamber of Public Enforcement Officers, with regards to acting upon complaints to the work of public enforcement officers and supervision of their work. Taking into consideration the importance of the mentioned problems, the Protector of Citizens issued the Opinion to the Ministry of Justice and the Chamber of Public Enforcement Officers20. The Protector of Citizens is of belief, on the basis of complaints to the work of the Ministry of Justice with regards to the supervision of the work of public enforcement officers, that the functionality in the supervision of the Ministry is not provided as well as that the consistent application of regulations which regulate this field is missing so in certain number of cases the Ministry does not inform complainants about the outcome of acting upon complaint, but only issues the statements obtained from public enforcement officers. When it comes to the supervision of the work of public enforcement officers, through complaints of citizens the Protector of Citizens confirmed that citizens are not entirely familiar with the authorization of supervision authorities so it is frequently expected from the Ministry/ Chamber to pass through control procedures decisions referring to the very process of enforcement, i.e. to abolish or amend the decision of the public enforcement officer. FINANCES An important segment which marked the field of finances in the reporting period is the tendency to promote the normative framework and remove shortcomings which influenced to a great extent the exercise and protection of citizen rights by adopting a set of tax legislations and reorganization of Tax Administration with the aim of more efficient and “Official Gazette of RS“, no. 116/08, 104/09, 101/10, 31/11, 78/11, 101/11, 101/13, 106/15, 40/15, 13/16, 108/16, 113/17, 65/18, 87/18 and 88/18. 18 “Official Gazette of RS“, no. 110/09, 70/11, 19/12, 89/13, 96/15, 104/15, 113/15, 39/16, 56/16, 77/16, 16/18, 78/18, 43/2019 and 93/2019. 19 “Official Gazette of RS“, no. 59/2016. 20 Opinion available at: https://ombudsman.rs/index.php/2011-12-11-11-34-45/6342-z-sh-i-ni-gr-d-n-upu-i-ishljnj-inis-rs-vu-pr-vd-i-ri-vnih-izvrshi-lj. 17 - 14 -