The High Prosecutorial Council has rejected the request of the High Inspector of Justice for the imposition of the disciplinary measure “Public reprimand” against magistrate B. S., with the duty of Prosecutor at the Prosecution Office at the Court of First Instance of General Jurisdiction in Saranda.
The High Inspector of Justice has initiated a disciplinary investigation based on a complaint from the Head of the Prosecution Office, against Prosecutor B. S., for the disciplinary violation “Repeated or serious violation of the rules of solemnity, rules of conduct in relations with the head of the office and with the personnel of the judicial administration.”, during 2024.
From the legal analysis of the facts ascertained during the disciplinary investigation, it resulted that the actions of Magistrate B. S. in relations with the head of the office and members of the personnel of the judicial administration constitute unworthy, improper, lack of self-restraint behavior, contrary to the Standards of Ethics and in violation of the principle of guaranteeing public trust in justice. The violations ascertained are not related to her professional activity, and may be important only for the purpose of her ethical and professional assessment, but are of a nature that the magistrate should bear disciplinary responsibility.
The HIJ investigation found that the prosecutor’s behavior and actions, committed with direct intent, have resulted in discrediting the position and integrity of the magistrate, as well as undermining public trust in justice. This behavior was committed in the office of the head of the prosecution office, as well as in the offices where judicial police officers exercise their activities, thereby creating the risk that this behavior will be followed by other magistrates of the same prosecution office or even beyond, since the court is also located within the same building, which implies the essential importance of the magistrate’s behavior not only in the premises of the prosecution office, but also outside it.
The HIJ investigation report notes that the essential purpose of the disciplinary measure is to protect the public interest by declaring the magistrate’s disciplinary responsibility and taking active measures to educate the magistrate, if such a thing is possible. The disciplinary measure also fulfills two preventive purposes: 1- special prevention, i.e. so that the magistrate does not commit any more disciplinary violations in the future; and 2- general prevention, i.e. so that other magistrates understand that inappropriate behavior should not be committed, as it is punishable by a disciplinary measure.
Taking into account the nature of the disciplinary violation and the existence of the mitigating circumstance, as a first-time violation, the magistrate’s limited 2-year experience in the function of prosecutor, the HIJ concludes that the actions/inactions taken by magistrate B.S. constitute a “Minor disciplinary violation” and proposed to the High Prosecutorial Council the imposition of the disciplinary measure “Public reprimand” against prosecutor B.S., for the disciplinary violation provided for in article 102, point 2 letter “dh” of law no. 96/2016 “On the status of judges and
prosecutors in the Republic of Albania”, as amended. The request was rejected by the High Prosecutorial Council.
