Professor of law Vladan Petrov stated that after the adoption of constitutional amendments, all prosecutors serving at that time should have been replaced. He emphasized that according to constitutional law principles, a radical break with the previous regime was necessary, which implies terminating the mandates of all prosecutors and electing new ones. However, this was not done through constitutional amendments but by a political act, namely a constitutional law.
Political Perspectives:
Left: Left-leaning outlets emphasize the need for systemic reform in the judiciary to ensure independence and accountability. They highlight Petrov’s call for a complete renewal of prosecutors as a step towards breaking with past corrupt practices and political influence.
Center: Center-leaning sources report Petrov’s statements factually, focusing on the legal and procedural aspects of the constitutional amendments and the implications for the prosecutorial system. They present the issue as a legal necessity and discuss the political context without strong bias.
Right: Right-leaning media may stress the political nature of the amendments and the potential risks of politicizing the judiciary. They might question the feasibility or necessity of replacing all prosecutors and emphasize stability and continuity in legal institutions.
