Summary

The administration of justice by an independent court is a fundamental right, which is stipulated in numerous international documents on human rights. The Constitution of the Republic of Estonia also stipulates in §4 that the activities of the Riigikogu, President of the Republic, Government of the Republic and the courts is organised on the principle of separation and the balance of powers. The courts are independent in their activities and administer justice in accordance with the Constitution and the law. Although the courts are independent, and activities that disrupt the administration of justice as regards persons connected with a court is forbidden, it is also possible to check – on grounds proceeding from the law – on the activity of the court authorities, based on the principle of the lawfulness and the balance of powers. In the opinion of European Union experts, the answerability of judicial power is one of the four elements on which rests the capability of judicial power. External checks on the disciplinary system of judicial power may endanger independence in the administration of justice. Judges, however, justify society’s decision to provide them with a certain freedom to carry out their tasks only if they are capable of making timely and effective decisions, which are generally in accord with society’s sense of justice. The article analyses one of the most effective subcategories of supervision over the courts – supervision of serving judges – by concentrating mainly on issues of procedural law in the disciplinary liability of a judge. There is also a brief look at issues of court administration, although a more thorough analysis is not the topic for this article. The purpose of the article is to provide an assessment of the regulation of supervision in Estonia, to draw parallels with the earlier situation and with the practice in other countries, and to list resulting proposals and conclusions.