VETERAN JUDGE DEMOTED FOR UNWILLINGNESS TO BOW TO HARABIN'S

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 BRATISLAVA 000314 SIPDIS FOR EUR/CE JLAMORE E.O. 12958: DECL: 7/16/2019 TAGS: PGOV PHUM KJUS LO SUBJECT: VETERAN JUDGE DEMOTED FOR UNWILLINGNESS TO BOW TO HARABIN'S PRESSURE REF: BRATISLAVA 256 BRATISLAVA 00000314 001.2 OF 002 CLASSIFIED BY: Susan M. Ball, CDA. REASON: 1.4 (b),(d) ¶1. (C) Summary: On July 8, a disciplinary senate ruled that veteran judge Anna Benesova be removed from her position at the Bratislava Regional Court and placed at the lower-level Bratislava District Court. Benesova was sanctioned by the senate for allegedly banning the recording of court proceedings in one of her cases; she has been on suspension for a year. Benesova asserts that the real motive for the disciplinary action was her unwillingness to decide a libel suit in favor of then-Minister of Justice, now-Chairman of the Supreme Court Stefan Harabin, and for her outspoken critique of the state of the Slovak Judiciary. If Benesova's assertions are true, and the available evidence suggests they are, then-Justice Minister Harabin used his authority as Minister to intervene directly in his own case. End Summary. How Will You Decide? ¶2. (SBU) In her capacity as a Bratislava Regional Court Judge, Benesova was assigned one of Justice Minister Harabin's libel suits against leading daily SME in September 2007. Benesova said that her superiors at the Bratislava Regional Court asked her to expedite the proceedings in the Harabin vs. SME case (the district court had decided in Minister Harabin's favor in August 2007, and SME appealed that decision). Once she had set the trial date, she was then asked how she intended to rule. ¶3. (SBU) Benesova refused to comply, and instead asked for additional evidence in the case, including the testimony of Harabin himself. Shortly thereafter, on June 2, 2008, then-Minister Harabin ruled that because there was a pending complaint against Benesova (in connection with the tape recording),on which Harabin would have to act, Benesova could not rule impartially in his libel case. Once a claim of partiality or bias is made, a judge may not proceed with the case in question unless and until the higher court evaluates the claim and rules in favor of the judge. ¶4. (U) The head of the Bratislava Regional Court, Judge Gabriela Simonova, then filed a disciplinary proposal against Benesova in response to the complaint. Both Benesova and her lawyer publicly stated that Simonova had tearfully apologized to her, claiming that she had been forced to file the disciplinary motion against Benesova and would have lost her job had she not done so. On July 17, 2008, Minister Harabin suspended Benesova, and on July 22 the Supreme Court concurred with Harabin's assertion of bias. ¶5. (U) In March, 2009, the Bratislava Regional Court decided in favor of Minister Harabin in the case against SME which had been previously assigned to Benesova. The Court ordered SME to pay 33,134 EUR to Harabin. Unequal Justice ¶6. (C) In testimony at Benesova's disciplinary hearings (two of which we attended),not one witness corroborated the complainant's assertion that Benesova banned the recording of the proceedings. Even if she had explicitly refused the request to record the proceedings, this is the first time such an action was treated as a serious offense and that the judge in question was immediately suspended. According to lawyers with whom we have consulted, in four other cases in which judges were found to have banned recordings of proceedings, the Disciplinary Senate either the dismissed the case or issued a mild warning. ¶7. (C) Despite the apparent lack of convincing evidence, the Disciplinary Senate decided on July 8 to demote Benesova, removing her from the Bratislava Regional Court and assigning her to the Bratislava District Court. The presiding judges offered no explanation of their decision, even given the radical departure from established precedent. Supreme Court Chairman Harabin said that he "respects the verdict" and encouraged Benesova to "apologize for her wrongdoing rather than attacking others." Is Harabin Really a "Private" Person? ¶8. (C) Benesova's version of the events (which we find credible) gives a lie to the GOS insistence that Harabin pursues these libel cases against media outlets as a "private person." The Slovak Perm Rep to OSCE stated that Harabin had sent letters "proposing an extrajudicial settlement to three publishing houses and one radio station. It is a private activity of Mr. Stefan Harabin. The proposal was not sent in his capacity of the Minister but of a private person~Deliberate spread of deceptive and untrue information concerning any person is unlawful. Mr. Harabin as a private person demands judicial BRATISLAVA 00000314 002.2 OF 002 protection of his reputation as an equal citizen of the Slovak Republic." However, in Harabin vs. SME, then-Minister Harabin used his authority to intervene directly in a case involving "citizen" Harabin. ¶9. (C) We are hard pressed to think of many other "private" persons in Slovakia who have the ability to remove potentially unsympathetic judges from their cases. We will continue to follow closely the threat posed by Harabin to judicial integrity, to individual judges, and to the increasingly beleaguered press. ¶10. (U) In her closing remarks at the disciplinary senate, Benesova said she had never witnessed such an atmosphere of pressure and fear during 36 years as a judge. Capable judges with long experience are relieved of their functions, and from day to day, other judges wonder whether they, too, will be disciplined because of their rulings. She stated that although she could have retired earlier this year and avoided the ordeal, after 36 years, some 15,000 decisions, and no previous complaints about her performance, she felt she had to fight to clear her name. Benesova will appeal the Senate's decision. SMBALL