|
President of the Supreme Court of the Slovak Republic
Supreme Court of the Slovak Republic as the disciplinary court Zupne nam. 13 Bratislava
06.08.2010
To file: 1Ds 1/2010 Re: Disciplinary procedure against JUDr. Ing. Miroslav Gavalec
|
|
|
Dear colleagues, On 26 May 2010 SITA press agency published this agency report:
|
|
15 judges in their letter of 2 September 2009 informed the top constitutional officials about disciplinary procedures against judges that would purposefully remove some judges from judiciary or are threatening and mobbing. Truth of the letter was confirmed by disciplinary motions against judges following published letter. Peter Paluda, Judge of the Supreme Court was suspended his judicial position because he filed a criminal motion against the Chairman of the Supreme Court. Jana Dubovcová the Judge of the District Court in Banská Bystrica was suspended her judicial position because of her critical opinions related to judiciary and to the Chairman of the Supreme Court. Both judges were proposed the strictest disciplinary punishment of removal from their judicial positions. These are similar cases as the disciplinary procedure against the Judge Darina Kuchtová for her evidence in criminal procedure, the disciplinary procedure against the Judge Anna Benešová with motion for removing her from her judicial position with suspended position because she did not allow recording at a hearing, and other cases reported in the open letter.
|
|
|
COUR EUROPÉENNE DES DROITS DE L’HOMME EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS EURÓPSKY SÚD PRE ĽUDSKÉ PRÁVA
Conseil de l’Europe - Council of Europe Strasbourg, France Rada Európy Štrasburg, Francúzsko
REQUÊTE APPLICATION SŤAŽNOSŤ
|
|
We consider the efforts of competent authorities to punish judges for their publicly expressed opinions on relations in judiciary as another signal that threatens free discussion on situation in Slovak judiciary. Our work is difficult in such environment and we are very sorry for the evidently growing disbelief in public against judiciary. It is necessary to freely discuss reasons of such situation, and atmosphere of fear where a judge cannot express any controversial and provoking opinion reflects means lack of freedom of spirit. Free spirit is not only a right but also the obligation of a judge. Any citizen has the right to a free judge.
|
|
|
|
|
<< Začiatok < Dozadu 1 2 Dopredu > Koniec >>
|
|
Strana 1 z 2 |