4.lapa
Conversation with sworn attorney Artūrs Zvejsalnieks.
How do you assess the acquittal of the former head of Latvijas Dzelzceļš Uģis Magonis and the Estonian businessman Oleg Osinovskis and the subsequent public statements of the Minister of Justice Jānis Bordāns (JKP) expressing outrage at the verdict and questioning the professionalism of Vidzeme District Court judge Kārlis Jansons?
Such statements are not acceptable, because the Minister of Justice is making unfit comments on the outcome of a particular case. It borders on threatening a judge because he is talking about a particular judge. It can only be seen as an attempt to intimidate the court and instruct the higher judge what the judgment should be in this case. Such statements by the Minister of Justice, and even more - in the area of his responsibility, are to be taken very seriously: it is interference in the powers of the independent judiciary and also brutal political pressure. It is also a very serious violation of the presumption of innocence, because, moving away from the specific case, everyone is considered innocent until it has been decided by a court. This can only be done by a court, not by a minister, politician or anyone else. Such statements are prohibited, for example, in the Criminal Procedure Law. And the European Court of Human Rights in similar cases points to a violation of the presumption of innocence. This is prohibited by international law, including Directive 2016/343 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on the presumption of innocence, which prohibits officials from making public statements of guilt before the conviction of an accused person has taken effect.
Bordāns clearly states what the judgment should be and clearly indicates what the consequences should be for the judge hearing the case. It is difficult to even imagine a more serious violation than what has been committed here. This is a pressure not only on the judge in question but also on other judges who may make judgements in the future that are not to Bordāns liking. He says that the evaluation of the quality of Kārlis Jansons' work should be submitted to the Judicial Disciplinary Committee.
It does not matter what the outcome of this case will be in further appeals because the Minister has created a chilling effect by indicating what the judgment should look like.
However, judges can also be criticized. There have been cases where a court judgment has not really made sense.
One thing is criticism because there is freedom of speech. But in this case, public statements have been made by the Minister of Justice, who is a senior official, and on his part, such statements are absolutely unacceptable. You can read the whole interview here:
Zvejsalnieks: Hard to imagine a worse violation of presumption of innocence than what Bordāns did
