Judge Pamela Záleská (source: SME - Jozef Jakubčo)
Pamela Záleská, the judge who sentenced former special prosecutor Dušan Kováčik in a landmark corruption case, is now facing severe disciplinary proceedings – not from politicians or activists, but from the leadership of her own court.
The head of the Specialised Criminal Court, Michal Truban, filed the complaint shortly after returning to office last December, according to Sme daily. He is calling for Záleská to be demoted to a lower court and to have her salary halved for three months, citing 23 alleged instances of unjustified delays in handling cases.
“I consider her continued presence on this court unacceptable and unsustainable,” Truban said at the opening of a disciplinary hearing on Monday before the Supreme Administrative Court.
Záleská has denied any wrongdoing and said she intends to respond to each charge in detail. Her lawyer, Matúš Harkabus, accused Truban of acting out of personal animosity. “The complaint is built on quantity, not substance, to create the impression she is unfit to serve,” he said, arguing that some of the delays cited are standard and others are not subject to legal time limits.
The case appears to go beyond questions of judicial efficiency. Záleská has long been a target of political attacks. In 2021, she sentenced Kováčik to 14 years in prison – a ruling that sparked outrage from Robert Fico, now prime minister, who called her a “judicial monster” and threatened disciplinary action. Although the Supreme Court later upheld Kováčik’s conviction, it reduced his sentence to eight years.
A separate disciplinary complaint has also been filed against her by Marcela Kosová, head of the Judicial Council. It concerns a delay in Záleská’s ruling on a conflict-of-interest motion in the case of David Lindtner, a former judge and adviser to the prime minister, who is accused of judicial interference and corruption. Kosová is seeking a 20 per cent salary reduction for three months.
Záleská’s defence claims both cases are politically and personally motivated. They cite a 2020 interview in which she publicly criticised Truban – then at the end of his first term – for assigning detention cases to a small circle of judges. Upon his return this year, Truban removed Záleská from court duty schedules – a move that reportedly went against the position of the court’s judicial council.
Harkabus also presented a magazine interview in which Truban lamented that he had once been subject to disciplinary scrutiny, while Záleská had not – despite, in his view, having a close relationship with prominent journalist Monika Tódová that should have been disclosed. Truban later wrote that such ties could undermine judicial impartiality.
When asked why Záleská was singled out first for performance audits, Truban said: “She’s known for delays.” He insisted that all judges would eventually face review.
“I am innocent,” Záleská responded to the accusations.
The disciplinary panel dismissed one of the 23 charges as time-barred. Záleská is determined to respond point by point, which is expected to stretch the proceedings into September. As the court adjourned, participants had already signalled that scheduling conflicts may cause further delays.
For now, one of Slovakia’s most recognisable judges remains on trial – not in the courtroom, but before it.
