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)

Independent Justice ...?

The past couple of weeks were a constant and intense involvement with the Judiciary; from attending disciplinary court sessions, conferences, discussion forums, or individual interactions with judges. The complexity of problems in which the Slovak judges find themselves is immense and trying to find a way to make even a smallest possible dent in the whole matter is a true quest.

First of all, when attending the said activities, one cannot help but to sense a slight discord - or let's say different set of wave-lengths that involved parties communicate with - causing perhaps exactly the very obstacle to a more efficient way forth. When taken the internal Slovak situation into account, one could - albeit to a limited extent - still understand; when coming from external sources, who wish to express matters in a fairly diplomatic way or, probably, to rather highlight the positive trends than to criticise, then it tends to be taken out of context and becoming prone to serious misinterpretation.

Last Thursday, while attending a discussion forum on "Judicial Integrity and Ethics", I was glad to that one of the panelists was a prominent US judge - giving examples from his own working experience. Whereas a few weeks earlier, newspaper articles seriously disfigured a statement on the independence of Slovak judges: Good sign as the Slovak Judiciary is better off with regard to the said independence than in most other states. Wow... but better off in what sense?

The mere fact, that certain laws perhaps do stipulate an independence (to whichever degree possible), perhaps the mere fact that control mechanisms are lacking - or the fact that the Judiciary is subjected to the quirks of one single person (NB - politically appointed!), and visibly controlled and thus heavily influenced - where one hardly does not need rocket-science to demonstrate for what reason - I would not dare to put into my mouth the aforementioned conclusion. If the formalistic setting invites for abuse, then the setting cannot be labelled as being sound, or 'better than other states'.

The second deficit is the awareness; in the first place among the majority of judges (and may I state, that there are enough individual judges in Slovakia, who dare(d) to speak about the state of the judiciary - with the result of being punished, stripped of their function) and furthermore the public as well. And as I have repeatedly pointed out in earlier articles, the media - in my eyes - plays relatively an insufficient role in this; articles are incomplete, distorted - leading unnecessarily to a misunderstanding by a large group of readers.

All involved parties must fully understand their active roles and responsibilities in the whole process; breaking through many barriers is never an easy task - thus a constant and a maximum exposure is perhaps the only possible starting point. But the starting point needs to be with a joint effort - fragmented and uncoordinated actions could in the end result in a complete misunderstanding and reinforcing prejudices instead of consolidating a mind-set. If only Brussels would finally realise, what importance this issue has.

A Catholic Time Capsule

Having spent a considerable time abroad - and not as a tourist - I cannot but admit that my exposure to different societies is fairly divers, and thus perhaps my mindset is influenced much more differently than the average of the current society around me. In an age, where we surf, chat, and mail - today even with our smartphones, and therefore a computer is no longer required for such - it is still remarkable how many people tend to be misinformed. This would not be too much of a problem were it not, that some of these people are in fact ... priests.

Priests have the sad privilege, that a community more or less take their word - relatively - for an infallible truth. Provided, the said priest is a humble wise and learned person, that would hardly be a problem to swallow. When such a person lacks some of these attributes, then it becomes dangerous. 

Last week namely, an acquainted priest-blogger posted an article, in my view as a slightly provocative gesture towards woman rights activists. The contents I didn't take too seriously, as it contains arguments, which in my view are no longer of this time. I left it for a while, until I started to ponder, why should a person with a certain community status feed readers with such a rhetoric? Would this not be exactly the school book example, why certain groups hardly get out of their shell and remain constantly indulged in navel-gazing?

I decided to re-read the article, and even to follow the discussion beneath - where the author is actively reacting on the comments. From here, the student-like diatribe appeared not to be just a lighthearted jest, but it transpired that not only was the author dead-serious, on top of it, the constant slightly old fashioned anti-Semitic implications were made. And sadly; obviously through ignorance, either from the theological or historic point of view.

A correspondence followed, where I tried to point out some missing facts from his statements, I couldn't help feeling a bit detached; as if we were talking at different wave-lengths, where the author had little understanding of the point. His fairly limited remarks on Judaism were embarrassingly off our nowadays reality. Lack of fact-knowledge, unaware of historic developments, global theological discussions. Almost, as if I was writing to a member of the clergy from the 17th century.

Unfortunately, this continues to feed wrong signals to the community, which regards priests as revered authorities. And indeed, such were the comments in the discussions. Certain conservative tendencies are perhaps not fully exclusive for Slovakia alone. Remarkably, his last sentence was; society still needed much to get rid of their prejudices. Fully true. Yet it was he himself, who repeatedly instigated these prejudices., and the facts I put forth had hardly an impact. Apparently, they live in a time capsule. A Catholic one that is; and those not belonging to this club hence are not noticed. 

And how dangerously far poisonous prejudices can go, is history... Beware.

The prerogative of politics

Ever since antiquity, rulers - usually born into their function, or believed to be predestined by a divine scheme - exercised their power with fairly little interest to the masses over which they ruled, up to the extent that life and death was decided within a second. Perhaps the Hellenistic conception of the first forms of democracy were in their lifetime exceptional, until the Enlightenment not much has changed. 

Especially the Enlightenment philosophies, where suppression of the common man was being questioned - and again; especially the divine justification for suppression - many fled the absolutist European nations to settle in a new world, which in the end culminated in the creation of the United States of America. This deed, to sever political ties from the old world, would finally inspire Europe as well - to begin with the French Revolution, as you know.

The concept of politics changed dramatically; it was the people themselves, who gave the mandate to their representative to exercise power in their name. History has shown us, that not all attempts and systems worked out quite the way they were intended, but the foundation of modern politics was laid. Somewhat after the carnage of two horrifying world wars perhaps most understood where the boundaries of power should lie - at least in some western countries.

After the fall of the Iron Curtain, the role model of the west became the idol to the newly freed nations, who have been suppressed for another odd 40 years under a rigid totalitarian system. Especially that experience together with a role model next door, one would expect they wouldn't fall into the same trap. 

Independence and a new economic system brought new responsibilities as well as experience. The framework of a NATO membership followed by entering the EU was a great step with especially high political symbolism. 

Nevertheless, something didn't go as smooth as expected; Though communist parties either forbidden or marginalized, practically disappeared from the political arena, yet politics itself differed slightly from the 1989 period. Except for some cosmetic changes, where elections were free (I dare to challenge, whether they were fair) politician, even those who embrace democratic, 'christian', conservative, liberal whichever western sounding values, would do exactly the same mistakes democratic leaders should not do; dodgy business because of absolute power. Including bribes, cronyism and the like. 

The level of acceptance - or being powerless to do something against these ongoing trends - makes the players complacent. Slovak politics is proving, despite a reformist approach and definitively many shades better than the former government, that except a handful of individuals with genuine good will, people based on a lack of awareness of accountability repeat over and over again the same absolutist slash totalitarian streaks, leading to a considerable mismanagement. 

The very few who protest are stigmatized, whereas the majority seems to be clueless. Journalism - as a perfect tool to raise this missing awareness - plays almost an unprofessional and marginal role, not in the least because of laws to curb them. And thus, despite the aforementioned memberships, Slovakia is appearing rudderless in a pool of fascist nationalism, corruption, xenophobia, an inefficient justice system up and including corrupt judges.

Politics is not a prerogative, politics is a responsibility. Else society will hardly move forward as it should. One can point perhaps at Berlusconi, but that's not the point and not a valid argument - else we would start justifying anything which is wrong. One could likewise point at countries with a more solid democratic tradition; the UK, Netherlands, Scandinavian countries, etc. Hungarian instigated double-nationalities, language acts, Vatican treaties; those are futile non-issues, which should be of a far lesser priority and definitively not being used as another excuse for media (or politicians themselves) shouting of another cabinet crisis. Politics has no vision, no leadership, no character, poor experience. 

After the elections, many replacements in government functions were indeed necessary.  Slovak corruption was back to dramatic levels. Unfortunately, but understandably, they remain to be political nominations, and in the end effect, in some cases they appear not always to be a success; a meritocratic system still does not fully exist. An opposition candidate - as long as (s)he has a good record, could equally qualify for a key position. In the meantime, far more vigilance from all of us is needed and foremost, more ethical objectives with a proper understanding, what politics is about. In the end; we all will in some way be affected. 

Thus the only prerogative politics should have is: To be professional and accountable.

A national tragedy

Not that the Catholic Church has been completely absent during the former coalition, yet the new government with a certain emphasis on christian oriented ' objectives'  has given it a renewed impetus to re-establish its hold on society. Not in the least, the slip of the tongue of coalition partner leader Ján Figeľ by referring to a Vatican Agreement, was not just a mere Freudian error.

This morning, although intended to have a relaxed weekend off; while the temperatures were still low spring was in the air. However, two articles somewhat disrupted this weekend bliss. The first article by Oľga Pietruchová as a response to an ongoing discussion regarding sex education. Ms Pietruchová, a leading activist on women issues among others, justly holds up a mirror against the generally used shallow argumentation of the overly conservative catholic clergy. Her article clearly summons up the nonsensical arguments, why the church should finally stop repetitively interfering in state school curricula, and her references to biblical passages to prove her point are thorough and relevant. Albeit that the article may sound provocative, having experienced a number of discussions myself, I know the feeling where one cannot help to become a bit sarcastic.

The disturbing part is, that the reactions which follows are - to say the least - scary. It sadly shows, how utterly un-informed society seems to be. But that would not be all:

Another article by Miroslav Kocúr reflects e.g. on two very recent developments, where a member of the clergy in a pastoral letter openly criticizes so called 'anti-religious' elements for hindering the beatification of a local priest. The fact that the said priest was openly collaborating with the Nazis during WWII, whereas in the other instance the municipality of Rajec wants to honour a fascist official with a statue. Equally, the fascist element is none of the concern of the involved activists. Here as well, the discussions around the said issues would raise your eyebrows, where openly proclaimed anti-Semitic remarks are not too uncommon.

There is a painful tragedy here; too many - and I could fully believe that it is purely a matter of ignorance, rather than intended ideological conviction - seem to have too little awareness regarding the historical dimensions of their past. Being proud of your origin is fine, glorifying a fascist period is dangerous. Even the more, when the Catholic Church becomes a tool in providing them the pseudo-intellectual ammunition.

Slovakia - despite an explicit constitutional reference - does not fully recognize a separation between state and church. And a Catholic Church supporting fascists is perhaps not a new given, but in a 2011 European Union this is out of the question. Simply unacceptable.

Much ado about nothing...

In order to keep politics lively, most politicians might think, we should - instead of governing - make a lot of noise. Noise about how difficult, even unbearable, our position is, preventing us from ... governing.

An economically unstable country like Slovakia, having felt not only a severe whiplash from the 2009 crisis (albeit not in the banking sector), but equally being paralised by a traditionally high corruption, should need a government, which takes quick, adequate and firm measures to get the vehicle out of the mud.

But instead a government sweating over fixing the soaring deficit - after the successful looting rampage of former prime minister Fico, a totally different, even an off-topic issue is paralysing the new coalition to get things done; the double nationality issue.

A sound mind would freeze with shock over such a scenario, but indeed the question whether Slovak nationals should or should not be able to hold two passports, is perhaps the least pressing matter. No matter how annoyed anyone could be about Hungary issuing citizenships to magyars-descendents abroad, it is hardly worth it to put the country's political - and thus economical - future at stake.

The threat of a come back of crypto-communists, who managed not only to squander the state treasury but even justice as well,  is more than just imaginary. Instead of playing big-egos in a kind of 3rd rated B movie, politicians, especially those who are currently responsible and accountable, should move on. And fast!

Slovakia's Justice; a European problem

The fact that Slovak politics in the past have allowed gross violations of civic rights in general is a well known fact. Even in Brussels. When inquiring with EU officials, what could be done about it, the answer is sadly enough a big apathetic "disinterest" - once being within the EU (already having passed the entry test), no institution is further interested, whether the status quo of a member state would suddenly deteriorate for whatever reason. And such attitude is regarded to be 'normally accepted'. Interestingly enough, having had a general medical chceck-up at the age of 25, never gives you any guarantee that at the age of 30 you will still in perfect health nor do I remember a case, where a policeman would not issue a speeding ticket, since the offender has passed his driving exam. In short; the EU logic simply does not apply, and therefore should not.

After several rounds of votes to nominate a new general prosecutor, as Mr Trnka's term has - in my view: fortunately - come to an end, the former prosecutor finally is exit. Yet, with a very remarkable 'farewell speech' on television. 

Not only has Mr Trnka very willingly swiped several cases under the carpet; where even a blind person could see that it was a servile gesture to accommodate former prime minister Fico's cronyism. All of a sudden, Mr Trnka appeared to be the martyr and started to recite a list of negative assessments at the address of the present government and particular persons in politics. So far, I think this is the prerogative of journalists, analysts or bloggers. 

A person, who should be non-partisan, neutral, serving the justice for all citizens, is broadcasting political messages to the public. Not a mere faux pas, but - when taken his exact wording into account - a pure vulgarism pur sang. An official, trespassing to such an extent his formal and informal competencies, should not only be charged for his misconduct, but finally initiate Brussels' apathy to turn into a more vigilant role to play in order to sustain  democratic values throughout its EU states. Brussels' silence might be perceived as being a silent accomplice. And this, in my view, definitely has not been the initial idea of the European founding fathers. 

Downfall of the pious

In the ecstasy of the 2010 elections' outcome, a coalition of let's say "clean" political parties would move on together to mend what 4 years of Soviet styled Ficoism have caused to society. The political sigh of relief was tremendous. Expectations were high and as a first hand observer myself, I must affirm that the chances were at least moderately positive. In fact, since there was hardly another option, it was the only way out.

The ongoing months have been - as could be naturally expected - slightly turbulent, there were however some issues, which clearly demonstrate Slovakia's immature political life; at least in the sense of the western democratic model, which after all is the model the whole European Union is supposed to bank on. 

Ironically, the very first hiccup initiated during the coalition negotiations was the controversy regarding the so-called Vatican Treaty, which like a rabbit-from-the-hat-trick was pulled out by the KDH (Catholic Democratic Movement) leader Ján Figeľ, causing not only an unwanted stir among the then potential coalition partners, but it suddenly added an unpleasant undertone in the presumed moral standing of the KDH - on the one hand a breach of an mutually agreed radio-silence among the coalition negotiators, and implying almost having a hidden agenda, which might seem alright with the average catholic voters, but the trivial slip of the tongue had far more serious consequences. Most surprising was the mere fact, that this very Ján Figeľ definitively is no rookie in politics. Au contraire, having spent years in Brussels, one would expect a more skilled politician.

The following clumsy missteps that we could witness were perhaps to an extent due to inexperience of those, who just entered the big world of big politics. However, as time would tell, the KDH party suddenly seemed far from an unblemished player.

The reference to the Vatican Treaty may have been to a degree partly a Freudian slip of the tongue, of perhaps even a wishful thinking, but it implied perhaps the ideal state, where the KDH politicians wanted to appeal to catholic values; ethics, moral, from martyrdom to leadership with clean hands and conscience. 

Then how could one suddenly perceive the fact, that Mr Figeľ's generous EU perks, in relative terms giving him a more than royal income multifold of an average Slovak income, accepted a prestigious apartment in downtown Bratislava for almost nothing (believe me, far more people would be more than glad to receive such type of charity). 

The 'mea culpa' by Figeľ was - one could say - a bit of a laugh. Perhaps, the catholic mind works different; just a few Hail Mary's and throw a couple of Paternosters, and the show can go on. Admittedly, it sounds a tiny but sarcastic, but that's exactly my point. So 'dealing with a residence issue' with such an income, Figeľ thought to get off the hook. Realising, the trick didn't work too well, he then gave in and declared that the apartment would be given to charity... I cannot imagine, that let's say 10 homeless souls are now finding a shelter in his luxurious historical monument. 

Communal elections followed, and the somewhat controversial KDH mayor of Bratislava was replaced; when - surprise, surprise - some not very appropriate causes surfaced. In the meantime, the former mayor has a seat in parliament as well (conflict of interests has never been much of an issue). I trust some serious discussions followed behind the thick KDH doors, and last week Mr Figeľ announced that the ex mayor would 'voluntarily' and temporarily leave the party - but... insisting he would cling to his mandate and remain a parliament member.

The skin of a Slovak politician is definitively thicker that that of an elephant. Those who shout that only catholic values are the only acceptable moral and ethical values, suddenly lose a bit of their credibility. Or is it still the believe, that rulers have still the feudal rights of medieval kings and lords?

The most pious, contrary to the expectation could in the end become the highest risk. Have they never strategically looked into this? I begin to doubt. One has the impression of an unprepared rural club has visited the big town. Still much to learn.