Disciplinary court... or mock trials

As an observer monitoring the developments in the Slovak judiciary, I tend to visit - together with NGO activists, Western diplomats and journalists, among others - disciplinary hearings, in order to get a real feel of how the justice system is functioning. In democratic societies, disciplinary actions are taken in extremely specific cases, where a judge would commit gross offenses against his professional and/or ethical position in society.

Slovakia perhaps has a peculiar unhealthy wish for the nostalgic times, in which the stalinist show trials want to be relived. Tragically not in a artistic film, rather in a real life setting, where the judges are accused of obstruction of their duties - for example - where the root cause usually is a critical view point against unprofessional practices coming from the president of the superior court of the Slovak Republic, Mr Harabin.

Not only has this Mr Harabin had proven amicable connections to a convicted drug mafia criminal - wanted by Interpol (a fact, he even didn't deny), but has slyly applied loopholes in legislation to amass not only greasy bonuses but also appointing people into positions, they are hardly worthy. Simply, too much power - too much abuse.

Being critical against all this, can cost judges severe limitations; banning them from entering their office - being de facto stripped off their duties and not able to exercise their profession (not to mention the implications following). Equally, addressing a letter to the President of the Republic, appearing on television, and the like.

A judges role, on the one hand being an impartial, above the parties authority to exercise his legal function, has perhaps equally an ethical moral responsibility towards the whole public; especially because of his intellectual oversight and judicial skills. Yet losing his job, limiting the prospects for his(her) own family is a pressure to curb the judges or to subject them to nonsensical trials.

Having visited a few disciplinary court sessions myself, one cannot but wonder, how a couple of persons are willingly supporting such blackmailing practice as obviously instructed by Mr Harabin.

Today, 6th April 2011, judge JUDr Juraj Babjak (pictured) - one of the signitaries of the movement "For an Open Justice"; judges who could no longer remain silent - has been subjected to a mock trial, cheaply orchestrated from above, where he was found guilty of obstruction (a vague term, since one of previous witnesses (a judge himself!) answered questions by the defense proving having hardly any knowledge of the law, or being completely disinterested in procedural matters - giving this verdict a cynical twist). 

This is, unfortunately, not an isolated case; thanks to the willingly cooperative super-swift appointment (hastily only within a few hours after being nominated) by President Gašparovč, Mr Harabin's tentacles are (still) long. It is only the more these mistrials get into the open, the less these practices will get room to occur. Injustice will thrive, when the just remain silent. These methods give room for corruption, partial justice, in which certain interest groups - and not in the least place a number of politicians - escape the arm of justice. And this cannot and should not be kept quiet.

Wishing JUDr Babjak (as well as his supportive and brave colleagues) all the best in his appeal.  

(will be continued)