One-fifth of judges part of pre-'89 Communist Party

State officials and transparency advocates are applauding the publication of the names of judges and state attorneys who were part of the pre-revolution Czechoslovak Communist Party (KSČ) but have criticized the carelessness of the Justice Ministry in compiling the list.

The list of about 1,000 names, which was published this month following a ruling in November, shows that 618 judges, about 20 percent of those now serving, and 359 state attorneys, almost 30 percent, were part of the pre-1989 KSČ.

However, the advocates who were behind the campaign that led to the ruling say the list includes some who were not communists while excluding many who were, and that more information needs to be disclosed about the judges to put their KSČ affiliations in context.

The data used to compile the list, according to Tereza Palečková, a Justice Ministry spokeswoman, is from the "statutory declarations of judge aspirants" from 1996 through 2006 that is required when applying to be a judge.

"The list is consequently being modified according to the information from the judges and the courts themselves," she said, adding there is no official means for sanctioning members of the judiciary who did not reveal past KSČ affiliations.

Two ministry employees were demoted after accidentally including the names of 25 people on the list who had not been in the KSČ. The ministry sent those people a letter of apology. 

Even transparency advocates who pushed for the list acknowledge there is a risk that legitimate judges and prosecutors could be harmed, because in addition to those wrongly implicated, there are some who joined the KSČ out of necessity.

"As a senator, I requested the ministry publish not only the judges who were members of the KSČ, but also their professional past," said Martin Mejstřík, a former independent senator who spearheaded research in 2007 and 2008 for advocating such a list. Justice Minister Jiří Pospíšil rejected his request.

"Theoretically, it could happen that a KSČ member did not take part in the political judgments of the party or refused to," Mejstřík said.

Even those who were part of the judiciary without joining the party warn about jumping to conclusions.

"I refused to join the Communist Party twice, and I know my life could have been much easier if I had joined, but I do not regret keeping to my principles," former Supreme State Attorney Marie Benešová told The Prague Post, adding, "People who have not experienced this can hardly judge us; not every communist was a jerk."

However, those concerns are not enough to outweigh the alarming results from Mejstřík's investigation, according to Neela Winkelmann-Heyrovská, who aided in the senator's work, which she said indicated unfair rulings and the ongoing employment of unqualified judges because of past connections.

"We found peculiar information about judges in this country. There are at least five judges who had no education in law," she said. "When the regime fell, there was a re-nomination process that was not done in any formal manner."

"They were writing through their buddies, and there was no analysis of the decisions made during the communist regime. They would just be pushed through Parliament in batches and reappointed by a showing of hands."

In addition to potentially hurting the reputation of legitimate members of the judiciary, some critics say the list won't contribute to improving the system.

"There is no evidence former party members have been any less moral than nonmembers," said Martin Myant, a specialist on Czech and Slovak economics and politics at the University of the West of Scotland. "Making this information public may cast doubts on judgments made without achieving anything positive. There must be a better ... way of checking the fairness of court judgments."

The push for the publication of names has been going on for years but was ultimately carried through by activist Tomáš Pecina, who in 2007 filed a request at the High Court in Olomouc for a list of judges who were affiliated with the KSČ. The Supreme Administrative Court ruled the list was an invasion of privacy. This decision was overturned by the Constitutional Court.

Although Palečková said publication of the information was expected to change little in the functioning of the judiciary, the information could help "prevent former communist party-liners from judging cases somehow connected with the past."

"It is possible some participants in lawsuits will use their rights to enter an objection against the prejudice of the judge. It will depend on the competent organ to address this objection and determine whether it is well-grounded," she said.

- Klára Jiřičná contributed to this report.

Cat Contiguglia can be reached at
ccontiguglia@praguepost.com