BRATISLAVA, August 3, (WEBNOVINY) — Justice Minister Lucia Zitnanska has submitted another proposal to start disciplinary proceedings against Supreme Court President and ex-Justice Minister Stefan Harabin. This time, she demands the toughest punishment for him- suspension from a judge post for life. The minister is tough on Harabin because she believes that the Supreme Court President failed when he did not appeal against the court verdict upholding discrimination lawsuits that eleven Supreme Court judges discontent with lower salaries than those of their colleagues from the former Special Court filed in December.
“I am convinced that he did not sufficiently and consistently protect the interests of the Slovak Republic in the case of eleven judges of the Supreme Court versus the Supreme Court, which culminated by his decision to not file an appeal against the verdict of the Bratislava I District court from November 10, according to which the Slovak Republic has to pay non-pecuniary damage of one million and one euros and compensation of court costs at 45,726 euros to the plaintiffs, said Zitnanska at a news conference on Wednesday.
The minister believes that Harabin has violated his duty to perform the post of the court president conscientiously, properly and on time. He has violated the regulations of the law on administration of state property and the law on budgetary rules of the public administration. Zitnanska believes that Harabin has committed a serious disciplinary transgression and because he was already once found guilty of committing a serious disciplinary transgression, she proposes the toughest punishment for him – removal from the judge post. Recently, the Constitutional Court decided to punish Harabin with 70-percent reduction of his salary for a year. It said that Harabin has violated his duties by not allowing an audit of the Supreme Court by the Finance Ministry. Minister Zitnanska initiated the disciplinary proceeding against Harabin in November. Later that month, the minister also lodged a second motion against Harabin because she was convinced that he seriously violated the duty of a judicial official, which seriously compromises the trustworthiness of the judiciary in connection with changes in the work schedule at the Supreme Court, disrespecting the principle of random assignment of cases to individual judges.
SITA