First Deputy Chairman of the Federation Council Committee on economic policy, former Minister of labour Sergei Kalashnikov has proposed to expand the list of grounds for early termination of powers of the judge. In particular, according to the Senator, judges should be fired if their decisions were cancelled by a higher court three times.
Kalashnikov has already submitted a draft Federal law to the deputies of the lower house of Parliament. The document was published on the official website of the state Duma. The draft clarifies that the initiative shall not apply to decisions of the courts of appeal or other judicial decision taken collectively.
“Early termination of powers of judges after the entry into force of the judgment of the court of higher instance, for the third time annulling the decision of the lower court adopted solely by the same judge during his term of office, will become an additional factor in the failure of judges to use their powers in violation of procedural norms”, – is spoken in the explanatory note.
The document notes that the adoption of this law will require changes to the system of statistical indicators of court activities regarding the introduction of a measure of the number of reversed decisions by the higher courts as a positive evaluation of their activities.
“The elimination of judicial errors or abuses a judge his powers by identifying the higher authorities in appeal, cassation and Supervisory procedures and ensures their achievement, but the efficiency of justice in this case is significantly reduced and adversely affects the authority of the judiciary,” – said Kalashnikov.
In a conversation with RBC Senator from the Bryansk region explained that in the Russian legislation there is virtually no mechanism for dismissal of a judge whose non-legal decisions have been reversed by higher courts. “But if the referee one, two, three times makes decisions that are then cancelled, then, sorry, such a judge need to drive the filthy broom,” he said.
According to him, with colleagues in the lower house a bill was not agreed to. Senator no and the positive opinion from the Supreme court. “I sent them a bill, but no reply was received,” admitted the Kalashnikov. He, however, believes that the adoption of the law can prevent “strong internal communications in the judicial community.”