CAT/OP/MKD/1/Add.1
8.
In order to ensure successful implementation of the external mechanism, an Action
Plan for establishing external mechanism for oversight of the work of persons with police
authorisations and the prison police was prepared. It includes concrete measures, competent
institutions and timeframes with deadlines for their realisation, necessary funds for their
realisation, as well as whether they have been projected in the budgets of the competent
institutions. The Action Plan was adopted by the Government on 3 April 2018.
9.
The Action Plan consists of 3 parts: establishing of a Unit for investigating and
prosecution of crimes committed by persons with police authorisations and members of the
prison police within the Basic Prosecutor’s Office for Prosecuting Organised Crime and
Corruption; establishing of a separate organisational unit – a mechanism for civilian control
within the Ombudsman, as well as additional legislative amendments (laws and by laws) by
the institutions with persons in possession of police authorisations and the members of the
prison police.
IV. Police detention
A.
Fundamental safeguards
10.
As regards section III of the Report dedicated to police detention for purposes of
observing procedural justice, and with a view to ensuring complete alignment of the
Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for the Treatment of Persons Subject to Restricted
Exercise of their Rights to Free Movement (persons in police custody, apprehended, and
detained) with the standards of the Council of Europe Committee for the Prevention of
Torture, a process to revise the aforementioned SOP was launched in 2017.
11.
The activity was conducted under the mentorship of an international expert
appointed by the Council of Europe and as part of the EU/Council of Europe Horizontal
Facility titled Enhancing Human Rights Policing.
12.
In January 2018, the revised SOP was adopted once the Office of the National
Ombudsman submitted its opinions and proposals in its regard. This new SOP has been
disseminated across all police stations.
13.
Regarding the right to a lawyer, it has been established that only a minor percentage
of persons had exercised their right to a defence lawyer in police procedures, which is, first
and foremost, owed to the fact that there is no legal requirement prescribed by the country’s
legislation for a lawyer to be present in such procedures on mandatory grounds.
14.
In keeping with the procedure prescribed, “should detainees ask that a lawyer be
present and available for consultation, police officers shall ensure that they are allowed to
call a lawyer of their own choosing and shall provide them with the catalogue of lawyers as
drawn-up and submitted to police stations by the Bar Association, and, without making
suggestions as to the selection of a particular lawyer on the list, shall allow detainees to
select one of the lawyers listed in the aforementioned catalogue. Regardless of detainees
deciding to ask for a lawyer or not, they shall sign the official report at the place of the
sheet reserved for signature.
15.
Should detainees ask for a lawyer, the conduct of all activities shall be postponed
until the arrival of the lawyer, to no longer, however, than 2 (two) full hours since the
moment of the lawyer being called.
16.
Should the lawyer selected fail to arrive within the aforementioned deadline of two
hours, detainees have the right to choose another lawyer listed in the aforementioned
catalogue of lawyers as submitted by the Bar Association.
17.
Detainees may converse/consult with their lawyer in private and the lawyer may be
present at police interviews conducted with detainees.
18.
4
Detainees may also subsequently ask to be granted the right to a lawyer.”