“Recently, I have registered several statements debating whether the courts in detention cases are the subject that has enough information to decide on the reasons for criminal prosecution and, ultimately, on detention. a clear answer – yes, such a body is and must remain a court, ” said Hrubala.
He recalled that in a democratic state, it is the court that answers the basic questions related to the prosecution if they concern restrictions on personal liberty and the parties to the proceedings want answers to them. “On behalf of the judiciary, however, I strongly protest against any hint of dishonesty of any court decisions in a way – but the judges had little time for that and I am wise as a prosecutor or lawyer.” stated Hrubal.
According to him, the judiciary does not have to care who the state authorities are suing and prosecuting. “However, if its decisions are only indirectly degraded, I consider it necessary to defend the judiciary in the interests of objective public information. It used to be, and I hope it is, an age-old and uncontested practice that even in the case of unclear cases, it is the court that will give definitive answers to the questions asked. ” added Hrubala.