Aigars Strupiss, the Chair of the Disciplinary Court, urges to discuss qualification of intentional violation of law in disciplinary cases of judges – so that the judge would not be afraid of being courageous in interpreting of the law, because of the fear of being held liable.  

The judge may not be called to disciplinary liability for incorrect application of law; however, the judge will be punished for intentional violation of law. “Due to peculiarity of professional activity of a judge, the border between intentional violation of law and courageous interpretation of law, which may play an important role in development of legal system, may be very vague,” said the Chair of the Disciplinary Court at the Plenary Session.

The judge must be courageous, timid judge may not discharge his or her duties in wholesome manner – said the Chair of the Disciplinary Court, stressing that one may not instil fear to interpret the law in a judge. 

In 2015, five from among seven cases examined by the Disciplinary Court concerned intentional violation of the law in judge’s work.  

As the second issue to be discussed in relation to the Disciplinary Court, the Chair thereof pointed out the extended discussion on expansion of authority of the Disciplinary Court, transferring it into the appellate instance for all persons associated with the court system.  

The Chair of the Disciplinary Court expressed the opinion that the Judicial Disciplinary Committee must remain an institution of judicial self-government, and complaints of other persons belonging to the court system have already been examined by the administrative court. “There is no need to break a mechanism, which works”, Aigars Strupiss, the Chair of the Disciplinary Court, stressed.

At the annual report Plenary Session of the Supreme Court, which was held on 26 October, reports on performance of last year were presented by heads of all structural units, and by the Chair of the Disciplinary Court.  The Disciplinary Court has been convened in the Supreme Court to assess lawfulness of appealed decisions of the Judicial Disciplinary Committee and decisions of the Judicial Qualification Committee.

 

See more about the Plenary Session:

Year 2015 in the Supreme Court – decrease of accumulation of cases and strengthening of cassation instance

Accumulation of cases in the Supreme Court decreased per 25 per cent

Three directions of activity of the Division of Case-law and Research are established

 

 

Information prepared by

Rasma Zvejniece, the Head of the Division of Communication of the Supreme Court

E-mail: rasma.zvejniece@at.gov.lv, telephone: 67020396, 28652211