Vprašanje korupcije v sodstvu: Pogled evropskih sodnikov

author: Aleš Zalar, Slovensko sodniško društvo, podpredsednik
published: Jan. 22, 2008,   recorded: December 2007,   views: 3310
Categories

Related Open Educational Resources

Related content

Report a problem or upload files

If you have found a problem with this lecture or would like to send us extra material, articles, exercises, etc., please use our ticket system to describe your request and upload the data.
Enter your e-mail into the 'Cc' field, and we will keep you updated with your request's status.
Lecture popularity: You need to login to cast your vote.
  Bibliography

Description

We are dealing with an extremely disagreeable subject that many would discuss only as a principle, rather than go into real occurrences of corruption. However, speaking of corruption in principle, we shall soon find that there is practically nothing regarding corruption we would not agree upon. As a starting point, I shall presume that corruption in the justice system presents a particular problem. A harmfull takeover of judiciary by economic or political actors. With respect to corruption, which represents a permanent threat to political and economic stability, the justice system is of crucial importance.

Anti-corruption programs shall fail if corruption is also present in the justice system. Hence, by eliminating corruption in its own ranks, the justice system can have a positive impact on reducing the level of corruption outside the justice system. We could say that judges are gate keepers of corruption in society. However, it is hard to imagine that the judiciary could remain pristine island of virtue untouched by corruption in a generally very corrupt state system. The justice system fulfils all theoretical conditions to face the phenomenon of corruption in its own ranks. It operates in the public sector, having a monopoly as the soul institution that safeguards the right to legal protection. The justice system is subject to possibility of the corrupt exchange of information or of profit from the relationship with the private sector, as well as the public sector.

Moreover, the judiciary has a special responsibility for judgements rendered. With this, we have all basic elements of the following theoretical formula: corruption is the sum of monopolies and discretions reduced by responsibility. That is why international community and Council of Europe member states pay constant attention to judicial corruption.

Link this page

Would you like to put a link to this lecture on your homepage?
Go ahead! Copy the HTML snippet !

Reviews and comments:

Comment1 Franc, January 26, 2008 at 10:08 a.m.:

Kaj lahko sodniki naredijo ?

To, da pri svojem delu SPOŠTUJEJO zakone in Ustavo. Sklicevanje na sodno prakso je v nasprotju z 125. členom Ustave, ki pravi : 125. člen

(neodvisnost sodnikov)

Sodniki so pri opravljanju sodniške funkcije neodvisni. Vezani so na ustavo in zakon.

Zato je vsaka sodba ali sklep sprejet na osnovi sodne prakse PROTIUSTAVEN.

Sodnikom, ki tega ne vedo bi morali že ZDAVNAJ odvzeti sodniški mandat.

Drugi problem pa je LASTNA razlaga zakona na osnovi katerega je sodnik sprejel svojo odločitev in je v nasprotju z samim členom na katerega se sklicujejo. Take razlage samih členov se sodniki ZELO radi poslužijo, da "opravičijo" sodbo ali sklep, čeprav je sprejet v nasprotju z samim zapisom zakona !

To pa SMRDI po korupciji .

Kdo dejansko odloča o HONORARJIH odvetnikov ?
Sodniki ODLOČAJO ali so stroški odvetniških storitev UPRAVIČENI ali ne !

Zato so za vse ASTRONOMSKE obračune odvetniških storitev "krivi" sodniki.

Tudi priznavanje astronomskih odvetniških storitev SMRDIJO po korupciji !


Comment2 Slovenec, June 9, 2008 at 12:40 p.m.:

SODNIŠKE DOLŽNOSTI IN NEZDRUŽLJIVOST SODNIŠKE FUNKCIJE
37. člen Zakona o sodniški službi (ZSS-UPB1)
Sodnik se mora vselej vesti tako, da varuje nepristranskost in neodvisnost sojenja, sodniški ugled in samostojnost sodne oblasti.

Sodnik ne sme ovirati delovanja sodišča zaradi uveljavljanja svojih pravic.

Sodniki trdijo, da štrajkajo zato, da bi državljanom zagotovili pravno VARNOST!

KAKŠNO pravno varnost sploh lahko pričakujemo od sodnikov, ki ne poznajo niti svojih dolžnosti, ki jim jih nalaga Zakon o sodniški službi.

NEPOZNAVANJE zakonov in balkansko sojenje je prava sramota za slovensko sodstvo in GLAVNI razlog NEPRAVNE države !

Zato mi ni jasno kako si ob takšnem KATASTROFALNE nepoznavanju zakonov sodniki sploh upajo štrajkati ?


Comment3 andrej, March 7, 2009 at 7:53 a.m.:

Poglej kdo govori o korupciji v sodstvu...Gospod tovaris Ales Zalar eden najbolj skorumpiranih v sodstvu..katastrofa in norcevanje iz ljudi...


Comment4 Dr.Zafar Saleem, March 4, 2010 at 4:26 p.m.:

It was a thought provoking lecture.I really enjoyed that.


Comment5 Dr.Zafar Saleem, March 4, 2010 at 4:38 p.m.:

It was a thought provoking lecture.I really enjoyed that. Being a student of law, I always look forward to watching and reading quality stuff. This video is one of a kind.

Write your own review or comment:

make sure you have javascript enabled or clear this field: