Spectator on facebook

Spectator on facebook

GUEST COLUMN

Legally appointed judges also at Constitutional Court?

Selections of legally appointed judges have been conducted electronically for several years now at all general courts of law. In practice, the way it works is that a computer program that cannot be tampered with generates the name of a judge to whom a specific case is assigned. This means of assigning cases creates legal certainty on the one hand, and eliminates any room for doubt regarding such choices on the other.

Selections of legally appointed judges have been conducted electronically for several years now at all general courts of law. In practice, the way it works is that a computer program that cannot be tampered with generates the name of a judge to whom a specific case is assigned. This means of assigning cases creates legal certainty on the one hand, and eliminates any room for doubt regarding such choices on the other.

In the past it happened that parties to disputes found out how cases were assigned at individual courts, and filed their charges accordingly. This is another reason to eliminate the "human factor". The only guarantee of the right to a legally-appointed trial judge is if cases are distributed according to work schedules and with the aid of a random selection system provided by computer technology.

This random selection method has been used for years at general courts of law, but surprisingly not at the Constitutional Court. Until recently, the rule was that the chief justice of that court handed out the cases. This of course offered less of a guarantee that cases would be handed out without regard for subjective interests that hurt the public interest. Many people still remember the infamous occasion on which the first chief justice of the court, Milan Čič, assigned a well-known case related to the kidnapping of the former president's son to Tibor Šafárik, even though until then the custom had been that the case was assigned to the judicial senate that had worked on similar cases. The argument presented by the chief justice shocked some people, because Čič said that it was necessary to find judges with other opinions on the given case.

In order that such incidents never be repeated in Slovakia, and that the country not violate Article 6 of the European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the manner of assigning cases at the Constitutional Court was brought into line with the method used at general courts of law. In 2004, parliament passed an amendment to the 1993 Act on the Organization of the Constitutional Court which took effect on August 1, 2004. According to this amendment, cases are assigned to judges randomly by the use of technology and programs approved by the court plenum, in order that no chance exist of any influence over the selection procedure.

Or, more accurately, that's the way cases should be assigned. The previous Constitutional Court never put this law into effect and never assigned cases in this way. The reason is not known. However, it is regrettable that according to the new work schedule of the new Constitutional Court from February 28, 2007, (available at www.concourt.sk at č. Spr 140/07, čl. IV bod 1, čl. V bod 1) the chief justice of the court continues to assign cases without the use of a random case assignation system.

In doing this, the Constitutional Court is not only breaking the law, but as the highest body of constitutionality in the country it is also violating Article 48 Paragraph 1 of the Slovak Constitution, which guarantees the right to a lawfully assigned judge. The curious thing about this is that the Constitutional Court in a previous ruling already said: "A legally assigned judge is one assigned in keeping with the court's work schedule". How can people's right to a legally assigned Constitutional Court judge be protected when the court's work schedule and case assignment system are illegal?

We are surprised by the actions of the Constitutional Court. But is it we who are wrong, or is the court guilty of an oversight? If the Constitutional Court has made a mistake, it is a problem - and a big one!


Ivan Trimaj and Ernest Valko are constitutional law experts practising in Slovakia.

Top stories

How did Communism happen in Czechoslovakia?

For the 40 years, Czechs and Slovaks would celebrate February 25 as Victorious February, even though the enthusiasm of most of those who supported Communists in 1948 would very quickly evaporate.

Prime Minister Klement Gottwald (right) swears an oath into the hands of President Edvard Benes on February 27, 1948 at the Prague Castle.

Cemetery with a remarkable creative concept Photo

The shapes of tombstones were prescribed until 1997

Vrakuňa Cemetery in Bratislava

Being young is harder than it used to be

The failure of older generations to sympathise with youth means politics are primarily a contest of who can hand out more gifts to old people.

Young Slovaks have problems finding proper jobs.

Historian: After 1948, Czechoslovakia was paralysed with fear

On February 25, Czechs and Slovaks mark 70 years since the rise of Communism in their common state. Historian Jan Pešek talks about the coup and its aftermath.

Demonstration in Prague, Wenceslas' Square, on February 28, 1948.