By: P.T., Demokracija
We have already written about judge Urška Klakočar Zupančič, the head of one of the departments at the District Court in Ljubljana, who expressed her political views and even published lies on her Facebook page, which diminishes the impartiality and independence of the judiciary. Vinko Gorenak, Ph.D., also pointed this out in his blog and, as he himself wrote, he also addressed a few questions related to the matter to the President of the Supreme Court Damijan Florjančič and the head of the Judicial Council, Erik Kerševan.
These are the two statements by the judge Urška Klakočar Zupančič, M.Sc., which she published on her Facebook profile:
“Dear FB friends, although the police stated that they are recording a high number of violations, and will tighten control because of that, you should know that this decree came from Janez Janša, who, at the government session, ordered that the police should go to the streets and to the borders between the municipalities, to collect fines. There will be no warnings; they will be issuing fines, so be careful in the following days. This is not about your security or health; this is about filling the empty state budget. I hope that the age of Janšaism will one day be nothing more than a sad memory, but until that day comes, take care of yourselves.”
“Everyone can believe what they want, but I like this rhetoric much more than that of Beović, Krek, Bregant, Kacin, and the great dictator, Janša. What is the truth? I don’t know. But I am sure that the people in Sweden are currently having a way better time than we are having in our country. In the end, we will probably all be in the same boat (in terms of the number of deaths, etc.), except that we will struggle for a long, long time after that, as we will have to face the severe economic, social and psychological crisis, as well as regret when it comes to what we did to our children. The future is, after all, theirs. In our country, the virus gave new elan to the frustrated individuals with a criminal past and a desire to suppress anything that stands in their way. And, of course, with the severe need for revenge. We are just collateral damage. Nothing else.”
The Minister of Justice advocates freedom of speech
We asked the President of the Supreme Court Damijan Florjančič, the head of the Judicial Council, Erik Kerševan, the Minister of Justice, Lilijana Kozlovič (SMC), the Speaker of the National Assembly, Igor Zorčič (SMC), and the SMC MP Janja Sluga, to comment on the statements, made by the judge Urška Klakočar Zupančič, M.Sc.
The first answer we received came from the office of the Minister of Justice Lilijana Kozlovič:
“Minister of Justice, Lilijana Kozlovič, M.Sc., advocates the freedom of speech, and also advocates respectful communication. At the same time, she wants to emphasize that everyone must perform professionally in their position, and in accordance with the ethical norms that apply.”
President of the Supreme Court Florjančič: If these posts were in fact made by the judge, they are completely inappropriate and not fitting for the judicial profession
We also received a reply from the Supreme Court:
“Regarding questions, we would like to clarify that in this case, as well as in all other similar cases, a judge must be aware of the limitations of the judicial function in expressing his opinions, in accordance with the provisions of the Judicial Service Act, and especially, in accordance with the Code of Judicial Ethics. The Ethics and Integrity Commission at the Judicial Council has the power to assess the possible ethical controversy of such conduct, as does the Disciplinary Court, in the case of serious violations, which also operates at the Judicial Council.
If these posts cited in the aforementioned case were in fact made by the judge, the President of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Slovenia, Damijan Florjančič, M.Sc., considers them to be completely inappropriate and not fitting for the judicial profession. Therefore, he has already informed the President of the District Court in Ljubljana about this case, where the aforementioned judge performs the function of a judge, and proposed appropriate action, as the President of the Court is the first who is responsible for reviewing, deciding and acting in such cases.”
We are still waiting for everyone else’s response. Let us also add that the mailbox of the Judicial Council is full and our e-mail with the journalistic question was rejected, and we also pointed this out to the Supreme Court via their Twitter account.
