An unusual coincidence

An unusual coincidence - on the last day of the competition for the vacant position of Chairman of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, June 26, a meeting of the High Qualification Board of Judges of the Russian Federation (HQCC RF) was supposed to take place, at which members of the Board were supposed to consider the issue of depriving me of the status of a retired judge .

I notified the Higher Qualification Committee of the Russian Federation in advance that I would not be able to attend this meeting in person due to illness, so I sent an application and a certificate of incapacity to work to the College by fax.

I am sure that the leadership of the Volgograd Regional Court was notified of this circumstance.

However, I was pleasantly surprised when I learned from the media that an entiredelegation of three judges from the Volgograd region had arrived at the meeting.

Apparently, they hoped so much and sincerely wanted my resignation to end, that, despite my good reason for not appearing, they decided to go and even, probably, hoped to convince the High Qualification Board of Judges of the Russian Federation to make a decision to end my resignation in my absence - the usual solution to issues in Volgograd .

But, unfortunately for them, the College did not take on such responsibility.

This event is reminiscent of the meeting of the public board on complaints against the press, which took place on May 25, with the exception of one character - then Charkin was present instead of Tulenkov. And so - “the same faces, only in profile.”

Apparently, Potapenko decided not to once again send the already famous Charkin into the line of fire.

Since I was unable to attend this meeting due to illness, the issue of ending the resignation was postponed until the fall .

But here’s an opportunity... There was information in the media that it was postponed to September, and on July 3 I received an urgent telegram informing me that “On July 16 at 15:00 at a meeting of the High Qualification Board of Judges of the Russian Federation a consideration of the chairman’s proposal will take place North Caucasus District Military Court M.Yu. Ptitsyn to bring me to disciplinary liability."

If this is not a technical error, then, I believe, the Higher Qualification Board of Judges of the Russian Federation should be aware of the existence of Article 28 of the Regulations on the work of qualification boards of judges, approved by the Higher Qualification Board of Judges of the Russian Federation itself, which indicates that the judge is notified personally or by registered mail with a copy of the submission attached. the chairman of the relevant or higher court or an appeal from a body of the judicial community.

I don’t understand how you can bring a retired judge to disciplinary liability?

Or maybe I just don’t have enough information on this issue.

But it is obvious that the persecution began - on July 4 and 5, notifications began to pour in from the Office of the Judicial Department of the Volgograd Region, from the Volgograd Regional Court, from the Qualification Board of Judges of the Volgograd Region, however, not about bringing disciplinary action, but about depriving me of the status of a judge in resignation.

So much for freedom of speech in all its manifestations.

I will give legal justification for this nonsense later.

By the way, I would like to say a few words about this remarkable document from a legal point of view, on the basis of which they want to deprive me of the status of a retired judge - the Code of Judicial Ethics.

I sent a complaint to the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, in which I asked to recognize the provisions of Part 1 of Article 6 of the Code of Judicial Ethics as inappropriate and violating the constitutional rights and freedoms of citizens guaranteed by Article 29 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

To which I received an answer from the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation with the following content: “The Code of Judicial Ethics is neither a federal law nor a law of a subject of the federation.”

But the ruling of the European Court of Human Rights on complaint No. 29492/05 of February 26, 2009 is a serious precedent.

Then, on the basis of what law do they want to deprive me of the status of a retired judge?