Judiciary evaluations ‘too lenient’
Of the 453 cases of disciplinary action taken against lawyers last year, only 40 resulted in convictions and four lawyers were struck off the books, a trend which Athens Bar Association President Dimitris Paxinos says indicates «leniency» on the part of the Supreme Court’s Second Instance Disciplinary Council. Paxinos told Kathimerini that there were issues involving the operation of the justice system in general that required attention. «I cannot claim that our disciplinary (committees) work perfectly, since there is always the human factor, the personal or vote-getting relationship that cannot be ruled out,» he said, although he admitted that the Bar Association disciplinary committees were the «only ones that functioned, despite inherent difficulties.» Paxinos blamed the inspection mechanisms’ laxity on the «corrupt judges who break their oath but who are given top marks (in evaluations.» He believes values have been reduced to the lowest common denominator, «disillusioning many of the more worthy members of the profession due to the absence of meritocracy.» «The general climate of laxity has even led to a legislative ‘cover-up’ by default, since the judge being evaluated would present for evaluation just two cases of his own choice,» continued Paxinos. «Radical changes are needed in the Court Organization Code and the Judiciary Officials’ Code so that evaluation methods really work, not by simply drawing lots among inspectors as has been the practice, but via a procedure that will combine meritocracy and reliability.» With regard to cases where there are criminal charges against lawyers, he said that, strangely, these were where the most acquittals were found. «That happens because the courts’ and prosecutors’ department secretaries do not pass on to the Bar Association, despite their obligation to do so, announcements of criminal charges, briefs and convictions against lawyers.» Given the long duration of criminal proceedings, when briefs have finally been sent to the Bar Association, the statute of limitations on disciplinary action has passed. Paxinos called for greater effort and responsibility on the part of all concerned, for empty posts in the judiciary to be filled and officials renumerated according to the provisions of the constitution. Improvement Prior to Justice Minister Anastassis Papaligouras’s amendment that requires cases to be concluded within six months and one year, the duration was one-and-a-half to two years in civil cases, possibly extended to about three years with a postponement, leading virtually to the denial of justice, added Paxinos. Describing the amendment as a positive move, he noted, however, that it called for further action, particularly on the part of court plenaries which decide on the number of cases to be tried, a number which was particularly low considering the statistics showing that only about one-third of these were heard.
