Disciplinary case against Head of the Prison Administration reveals chaos in Justice Minister Jānis Bordāns' house

The text of the decision of the Minister of Justice "On the termination of the disciplinary proceedings against the Head of the Prison Administration, General Ilona Spure" reveals the tense, unethical relations, disregard for subordination, irresponsibility and waste of taxpayers' money of the officials of the authority under the Ministry of Justice.

A copy of a restricted document obtained by Neatkarīgā shows that on October 16, 2020, the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Justice Jānis Bordāns decided to terminate disciplinary proceedings against the then head of the Latvian Prison Administration (LPA). The Minister's decision sweeps under the carpet the facts about the waste of money in the supervisory structure of the Ministry and the facts about the unacceptable relationship between a superior and a subordinate in a public institution.

Spure left her post in October last year, a year after J. Bordāns' decision to terminate the disciplinary proceedings against her. At the time, the official reason given for leaving early was Spure's wish to retire. Actually, Spure's term of office does not expire until July 18, 2023.

On the basis of the provisions of the law

The disciplinary proceedings against General Spure were initiated on July 17, 2020, on the basis of Articles 3, 16, 17 and 18 of the Law on Disciplinary Liability of the Officials with Special Service Ranks Working in Institutions of the System of the Ministry of the Interior and the Latvian Prison Administration.

It states, inter alia, that "the higher official shall be held to disciplinary liability, if he or she has not ensured control over the compliance with the service discipline within the Institution (structural unit) subordinated to him or her, and also implementation of the measures within his or her competence for the prevention of such deficiencies in the service which have led or may lead to violations of the service discipline by the subordinated officials within the Institution (structural unit)."

The text of the decision signed by the Minister states that a special Disciplinary Board of Inquiry will be set up on August 13, 2020, to assess the disciplinary case of Spure. It found that "Spure may have failed to comply with her obligations under the law and may not have performed her duties conscientiously and honestly", ... "the data protection advice to the employees of the Administration and its structural units has not been sufficiently and adequately provided; there has been insufficient monitoring of whether the requirements of the regulatory enactments relating to data protection are complied with in the Administration, data protection-related monitoring measures have not been carried out and training of employees involved in data processing activities in Riga Central Prison, Olaine Prison and Liepāja Prison has not been carried out", … "internal regulatory enactments and other documents in the field of data protection have not been developed", … failure to "establish the legal basis for each processing of personal data, the type of personal data and the purpose of the processing, the categories of data subjects, the categories of recipients of personal data, the type of processing envisaged, the means of obtaining personal data, the place of processing of personal data; failure to ensure that none of the duties performed by Kulakova (meaning Colonel Oksana Kulakova, Deputy Warden of Ilguciems Prison) and Gruzdova (meaning Major Nataļja Gruzdova, Chief Lawyer of the Legal Regulation Department of the Internal Affairs Service) in their capacity as Data Protection Officers in the Administration give rise to a conflict of interest", etc.

How to get the 30% bonus

The decision signed by Bordāns states that on October 27, 2016, Kulakova approached Spure with an initiative to study the training program of the Personal Data Protection Officer and to take the qualification examination in order to perform the duties of the Data Protection Officer of the LPA. She requested that the training fees be covered by the funds of the LPA.

A year and a half later, Gruzdova also reported to the Head of the LPA and took the initiative to follow the training program and qualify as a personal data protection officer. Gruzdova's initiative was also supported by Kulakova.

On April 25, 2018, the LPA issued an order "On the assignment of additional duties", assigning Kulakova and Gruzdova to perform the duties of data protection officer in addition to their direct duties,

which entailed a salary supplement of 30% of the salary.

Got the money, ignored the work

Although the Colonel and the Major have received a personal data protection bonus, no progress has been made on the data protection front. The decision states: "Spure had repeatedly pointed out to Kulakova that the employees of the Administration were complaining about the quality of data protection issues, long response times and communication problems."

Gruzdova also was not too successful with her work. Gruzdova has regularly referred to her workload at her main job, which has prevented her from focusing on her duties as a data protection officer. Gruzdova also had problems in her communication with colleagues and management. The decision states: "Spure states that the documents referred to in Gruzdova's report Gruzdova unethically 'threw back' to Spure, which has further exacerbated Spure's already strained communication with Gruzdova. Employees of the departments of the Administration have frequently complained about the difficulty in obtaining advice from Gruzdova in her capacity as a personal data protection officer because of her refusal to provide advice in writing by e-mail. Gruzdova only provided advice verbally. Complaints have often been made about Gruzdova's unethical communication with colleagues, raising her voice, telling colleagues that they are lawyers and therefore should follow the law, not ask her for advice."

"Raised her voice" against the General

General Spure has asked the Colonel and the Major to report on the work they have done to protect personal data, but the two officers have not given any reports. The decision states that the Disciplinary Board, on the basis of Spure's statement, found that "the greatest conflict in the Administration was caused by Gruzdova, who has problems with communication. Gruzdova personally insulted other colleagues, for which Spure received many complaints. Spure asked the employees of the Administration to submit a written report on Gruzdova's unethical communication in order to be able to refer the matter to the Ethics Committee by resolution. However, the employees of the Administration did not write the reports, claiming that they were afraid that they would not be able to resolve any work issues afterwards."

"There was a case when Gruzdova also dared to raise her voice against Spure, to threaten Spure specifically and constantly with all possible liability, including criminal liability."

"To this day, Spure has not understood exactly what article she would have violated if she had violated any. Spure's action in that case was that she asked the Head of the Administration's Human Resources Department to enroll Gruzdova in a communication course at the School of Public Administration. The Head of Human Resources registered Gruzdova for the course, but when the date for the course arrived, Gruzdova did not attend due to an excused absence."

Bordāns' lax decision

The decision signed by Bordāns in his capacity as Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Justice shows that although the two officers did not carry out their work in the field of data protection, they continued to receive a 30% salary supplement.

The decision states, inter alia, that in the disciplinary proceedings "the Commission considers it questionable that Spure stated in her explanation that she had no right to ask the data protection officers for reports." "Spure did not exercise sufficient control to ensure that Kulakova and Gruzdova carried out their duties conscientiously and honestly and that the orders and instructions of Spure, a senior official, were carried out in a sufficiently effective manner." "It follows that Gruzdova's motivation and her own proposal to perform, in addition to her core duties, the duties of Personal Data Protection Officer at the Administration were more decisive than her personality assessment for performing such duties, which resulted in increasing and unsolvable conflicts at the Administration." "In conclusion, in 2018 and 2019, Spure has not been sufficiently effective in ensuring continuous control over the observance of official discipline in the Administration, nor has she carried out appropriate duties to remedy the deficiencies in the Administration which have been or may be the cause of breaches of official discipline by subordinate officials, in accordance with her competences."

The decision signed by Bordāns

does not analyze why the two officers were continued to be paid a bonus for duties they did not perform.

Having considered the information provided by the Disciplinary Board and its conclusions, Bordāns decided: "To terminate the disciplinary proceedings against the Head of the Administration, General Spure. At the same time, Spure should discuss the organizational issues of the Administration with the Minister of Justice."