Ana Karaivanova, Chief Inspector at the Inspectorate of the Supreme Judicial Court: The Inspectorate does not check for conflict of interest

Ana Mihova

- Mrs. Karaivanova, what caused this scandal with the election of the Head of the SCC (Sofia City Court)?
- For years, the judiciary has been the usual suspect for all disastrous events occurring in the Bulgarian state. It cannot be denied that the judicial system itself actually preconditioned this. It was caused by the slow pace of criminal and civil proceedings, by the uncustomary court decisions, as well as by the unusual application of the law. But the judiciary itself has to fight for its good reputation which has been brought to a very low level. In fact, it must defend itself not only via attacking others. In my opinion, it alone should seek ways to eliminate its shortcomings and deal with fraudulent people.

- Actually, it did not become very clear why the SCC Inspectorate will check the entire SCC Criminal Department rather than only the newly elected Chairwoman, Vladimira Yaneva?
- So far, we have not carried out an inspection of the SCC Criminal Department because a check was already carried out following the order of the then chairman of the Sofia Court of Appeal (SCA), Veselin Pengezov. This inspection conducted by three SCA criminal judges covered the period of the entire 2008 to September 30, 2009. In fact, I reviewed again the received inspection results after the last meeting of the SJC (Supreme Judicial Council) (last week, editor's note). The final results made it clear that there were judges, including Velichka Tsanova (editor's note, the other main contender for the post of SCC Chair), who, so far, have had no overdue proceedings for the period 2008 – 2009. During part of the inspected period, Mrs. Vladimira Yaneva took her maternity leave. Besides us, Mr. Pengezov mailed the final report to the SCC Chairman, Georgi Kolev (editor's note, the current Head of the Supreme Administrative Court) and proposed which judges should receive disciplinary punishment.

- The statement you presented showed that Vladimira Yaneva was not suggested for disciplinary punishment because she took her maternity leave and had no overdue cases.
-...Exactly

- Did you receive a fraud signal over the case of Sofia Real Estates SPLTD which proved that it had been delayed before being returned to the Prosecutor's Office?
- We have not received such a signal. In 2010, we conducted an inspection of SCC based on the information which Mr. Pengezov sent us - a printout of the lists of judges who had failed to rule on cases within the set deadline. There are striking cases such as unrecorded cases in 2006, for example. We drafted a proposal for disciplinary punishment of the judge with the highest number of drastically delayed cases. In the discussions of candidates for SCC Head, Galina Zaharova (editor's note, SJC member, left the hall in protest) explained that the certification of Velichka Tsanova failed to receive the maximum number of points for a B assessment since we had not carried out an inspection.

- You were reproached for not conducting an express inspection not only of Vladimira Yaneva and of the case of Sofia Real Estates SPLTD but of the entire SCC Criminal Department, which will undoubtedly take months.
- I repeat that I do not check for conflict of interest. The inspection of the entire SCC Criminal Department will allow to detect which judges delay their proceedings and to what extent. Thus, we will be far more objective.

- But the results of your inspection will be released several months after the scandal concerning Vladimira Yaneva abates.
- We do not partake in scandals. We are not acting as a call centre. We are not operating under assignment, thus deepening the scandal. Nobody needs that. Let us examine the entire work of the SCC Criminal Department. It must become clear how, under the same conditions and roughly with the same workload, some magistrates keep the set deadlines, while others fail to do it. Upon presenting their concepts, all candidates acknowledged that there were problems in the distribution of cases. We receive letters from the judges themselves, who have long been dissatisfied with the manner of allocation of cases. I respect highly the brave, awake conscience of all magistrates. I admire this behaviour because it is dignified. Actually, taxpayers pay their salaries in order for them to compile their case files. Let them write their statements and opinions in their spare time. Therefore, we will check which ones stated their reasons for issuing sentences within the deadlines stipulated by law, as well as how long the cases were delayed and what were the causes for that.

- Is the one-year deadline in breach of the law?
-It is a drastic violation of the law because the CPC (Criminal Procedure Code) grants a one-month period.

- For example, if you detect such a violation, which is relevant to the new SCC Head, how will it affect him?
- The same way it will affect all others who failed to keep the set deadlines. We will make proposals for disciplinary penalties.

- Were you personally surprised by the reaction with respect to the new SCC Head. Magistrates negotiated to defend their standpoint?
- Everyone tends to defend oneself.

- Were you satisfied with the debate on the selection of the SCC Chair?
- Let me not give estimates. The election concerned all magistrates.

- How could this scandal affect the credibility of the judicial system?
- Negatively.

- Is there any political pressure on the SJC Inspectorate?
- No. We communicate officially with all institutions. Signals are submitted to us by the Ministries, Parliament, Ministry of Interior. I think this is the right way of communication. In a given country, authorities should collaborate each within its own powers. Actually, the judiciary is not utterly isolated from the other authorities.

Прочети цялата новина

Свързани новини: