Five judges were dismissed from the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court, while the magistrates showed their human face to a First Judge who had delays in issuing decisions, but faced recurring serious health problems for a long period of time and yet she changed her image radically, resetting the delays to zero, so that she not only remained in the judiciary, but was rewarded by the adjudicators in a unanimous decision.

The Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court, under its president Ioanna Klapa-Christodoula and with the participation of the Prosecutor of the Supreme Court Georgia Adilini, dealt with the question of the permanent suspension of judges, for incompetence in the exercise of the judicial function, due to the many delays in issuing decisions for a long period of time.

In particular, unanimously, a judge of first instance, the wife of a lawyer, who had been experiencing delays since her first entry into the judiciary as a judge, was permanently suspended, with the possibility of being able to work in the public sector.

According to the annual inspection reports, the delays, per year, ranged from 36 to 130 cases, and she had repeatedly been deprived of 73, 61, 53, etc., in various judicial years.

At the same time, she had been disciplined with a fine of one and three months and had been declared ineligible for promotion.

According to the submission, there had been protests by the Bar Association and also by litigants about her delays and the delays were increasing.

Further, according to the submission, in 11 of the 12 inspections conducted on her, delays were reported, as well as that she was not conscious, burdened her colleagues with the files taken away from her and charged to others and inconvenienced lawyers and litigants.

When asked by the President why during the pandemic period when the courts were understaffed she did not take care to make up for her delays, the answer was that she was studying her child.

The Chief Justice herself generally displayed a belligerent attitude towards the court.

In particular, she indicated that she was conscious of her duties, but acknowledged that she had made mistakes.

She questioned the number of pending cases cited by the presiding magistrate, saying that there had been publications of judgments from the backlog and that the number had been reduced and that only 70 cases had been removed from her hands.

She further said that the backlogs were due to many personal reasons, but also that the decisions she was issuing were not sloppy, that she was charging a large number of decisions and that she had reduced the backlogs.

Ms. Klapa intervened, pointing out that the decisions issued must be good, correct and proper from a legal point of view and issued in a timely manner, adding that the citizen cannot wait for a decision after years.

Regarding the large number of cases that the Chief Judge claimed she was charging, after asking her if her other colleagues were charging the same number of cases and the answer was in the affirmative, the President said she did not have a workload as she claimed, since “she charges the same portion of cases as her other colleagues unless she wants more”.

As a defence witness for the Chief Justice, her husband testified, who said that she was working excessively. He said that he would get up at 2 o’clock in the evening and watch her on the computer, but at 5 o’clock in the morning he would watch her on the computer again.

Both the presiding judge and Ms Adilini were in favour of her permanent dismissal and she was eventually dismissed unanimously by the judiciary.

‘First judge’ not dismissed

The question of dismissal had been referred to the Plenary Court by another second, a First Judge, who was long overdue in issuing judgments ranging from 22 to 100 per year and had 11 disciplinary decisions against her imposing fines of 10 to one month’s salary deprivation.

There was even a case where it took 29 months to issue a decision.

According to the adjudicator, the Chief Magistrate had been experiencing long arrears in previous years, but according to the latest inspection report the arrears were almost nil and she recommended that she should not be suspended as there were no grounds.

She in a modest attitude said that she had been facing successive serious chronic health problems for a long period of time, had undergone surgical procedures and had taken 11 months sick leave. She subsequently broke her arm and was in a cast. Despite this, she was able to zero the delays.

The Full Board unanimously ruled that she should not be dismissed as she had rectified the negative image she had created.

Disparate case

The Plenary considered a peculiar case of a former First Instance Judge who was permanently dismissed from the judiciary for incompetence (delays) and was found to be insufficient to be appointed to the civil service.

In the year 2020 she requested a retrial in the Disciplinary Chamber, claiming that she was not present at the hearing, although she had been summoned to the hearing at that time.

At that time, her request for a retrial was rejected.

She has now come back with a new request for a retrial, claiming that there is new and unknown evidence and asking to be examined as a defence witness by a former judge.

As new evidence, among other things, she relied on the fact that she had obtained a licence to practise as a lawyer, but during the process of obtaining it there were problems with the services of the Ministry of Justice, that she tried to work as a lawyer three years after her dismissal but was unable to do so, and that she was facing financial problems, etc.

However, her conduct, as well as that of the witness she proposed to the court, was out of the ordinary.

In fact, Ms. Klapa took the witness off the floor after several pleas for him to comply with his conduct and what he had said, as he attempted to argue as counsel for the former Chief Magistrate.

See Also 

Crete: 57-year-old German tourist fell and was injured in gorge

The conduct of both the former First Judge and the witness, a former judge, provoked a strong reaction from Ms. Klapa, Ms. Adilini and also from the Vice President, Nicholas Pipiliga.

Nevertheless, the former First Judge’s application for a retrial was rejected for lack of new evidence, but she was allowed to be appointed to the civil service.