CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 28 février 2008

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s9FF10068 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s5CB9E8AB { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. 106 March 2008 Kudeshkina v. Russia - 29492/05 Decision 28.2.2008 [Section I] Article 10 Article 10-1 Freedom of expression Removal from judicial office for making critical media statements about the Russian judiciary: admissible   In 2003 the applicant, who at the time held judicial office at the Moscow City Court, was appointed to sit in a high-profile criminal case concerning abuse of powers by a police investigator. Following a public prosecutor’s challenge of both the applicant and the lay assessors on the grounds of bias, the applicant was eventually removed from sitting in the case. She subsequently requested that the President of the Moscow City Court, Mrs Yegorova, be charged with a disciplinary offence for having allegedly exercised unlawful pressure on the applicant during the above proceedings. She accused Mrs Yegorova, inter alia , of allegedly requesting information on the merits of the case while it was still pending, removing certain documents from the case file, forcing her to forge minutes of the hearing and giving her instructions on how to proceed in the case. Having examined the applicant’s allegations, the competent authority decided not to institute disciplinary proceedings against Mrs Yegorova because there were no grounds for doing so. Several months later the applicant stood as a candidate in general elections to the Russian Duma. During her campaign, which included a programme for judicial reform, she gave interviews to two newspapers and a radio station in which she was highly critical of the Russian judiciary. Among other things, she expressed doubts as to the independence of the courts in Russia and fears of “judicial lawlessness” within the country. She was not elected to the Duma but was reinstated to her previous judicial office. Meanwhile, the President of the Moscow Judicial Council sought the applicant’s removal from office claiming that during her election campaign she had behaved in a manner that was incompatible with the authority and standing of a judge. In May 2004, without hearing representations from the applicant who was absent, apparently without a valid excuse, the competent authority decided to remove her from office, stating that she had “disseminated deceptive, concocted and insulting perceptions of the judges and judicial system… [thus] degrading the authority of the judiciary”. The applicant subsequently appealed against that decision to the Moscow City Court and requested a transfer of jurisdiction in her case for lack of impartiality, but to no avail. Admissible under Article 10.   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes