Supported Nausėda’s decree to remove a judge for demotion: such behavior destroys trust in all courts

Decree of dismissal of judge R. Augustė on December 23 of last year. signed by President Gitanas Nausėda; he also suspended the judge’s powers pending a decision on his dismissal.

Sigita Rudėnaitė, the president of the Council of Judges, said she supported the presidential decree, because R. Augustė had not been disciplined for the first time, but did not draw any conclusions.

“The judge raises his opinion on everything, we have not heard the judge criticize his sufficiency – the reluctance to admit his mistakes, the reluctance to correct his behavior is incompatible with the continuation of the charge, that behavior destroys trust in the courts, those things it should not be tolerated, “he said. Rudėnaitė.

At the time, R. Augustė explained at the Council of Judges meeting that he did not feel guilty for doing something illegal and thought that he should not be removed from the position of judge.

The 13 members of the Council of Judges who participated in the vote supported the removal of Judge Klaipėda for demotion.

The dismissal of R. Augustė was proposed by the Court of Honor of Judges after examining the disciplinary case initiated by the judge – it found that the judge violated various requirements of the Code of Judicial Ethics, violated the principles of duty, justice and impartiality, exemplary , decency, principles of solidarity.

The petition to initiate disciplinary proceedings against R. Auguste was submitted by the President of the Klaipėda District Court.

The Court of Honor of Judges determined that a judge had not fulfilled the legal duty to notify the president of a court of proceedings in which she was a party to the proceedings. It was also established that the judge did not withdraw from the civil case in which one of the parties was the Waste Management Center of the Klaipėda Region.

According to the data of the disciplinary case, Judge R. Augustė undertook to hear this civil case, although she has been litigating with this legal person for several years in various Lithuanian courts.

Subsequently, after the UAB Klaipėda Region Waste Management Center requested dismissal, Judge R. Augustė nevertheless withdrew from the examination of this case, but during the examination of the exclusion she was applied, it did not assess whether there were real facts that cast doubt on its impartiality, but it did so for very different reasons, presumably under pressure from her, citing accusations of corruption in another judge of the same court.

This civil case was transferred to another judge of the Klaipėda Municipal Court of the Klaipėda District Court, then Judge R. Augustė presented an official report to the president of the court regarding the evaluation of the judge’s ruling, and after drawing personal conclusions on its illegality, he is asked to decide the disciplinary responsibility of the judge.

The conduct of Judge R. August was evaluated by the Court of Honor of Judges as an interference in the administration of justice of another judge and a violation of the constitutional principle of independence of a judge.

When making its decision, the Court of Honor of Magistrates evaluated the seriousness of the crimes committed, their continuity, the circumstances of their commission, the data that characterizes the judge, the judge’s attitude to the violations – its explanations show that the judge evaluates your actions uncritically.

In choosing the measure of disciplinary responsibility, the Honor Court of Judges took into account the fact that the question of the disciplinary responsibility of Judge R. Augustė is not resolved in the Honor Court of Judges for the first time. 2013 and 2017 She was severely reprimanded by judges of the Court of Honor of Judges. Although the sentences have expired, these data were considered by the Court of Honor of Judges as additional characteristics of the judge and showing that the judge did not draw conclusions, her behavior did not change.

“The constant disregard and misunderstanding of the basic requirements of the Code of Ethics for Judges make it possible to classify the conduct of a judge as incompatible with the principles of the activity of judges, degrading the name of a judge and undermining the authority of the court. By evaluating all the circumstances, it can be concluded that the lighter disciplinary sanctions would not be dramatic enough, ”said Virgilijus Grabinskas, then president of the Court of Honor of Judges.

Judge R. Augustė appealed the decision of the Honor Court of Judges to the Lithuanian Supreme Court, but the three-judge panel rejected her appeal as unfounded.