Dismissal of a judge from office

Straipsnyje analizuojama teisėjų atleidimo iš pareigų, pasibaigus įgaliojimų laikui, konstitucinė doktrina. Aptariamos teismų ir teisėjų nepriklausomumo garantijos. Viena iš jų yra teisėjų įgaliojimų trukmės neliečiamumo garantija. Konstitucija neįtvirtina asmens, kuris apylinkės teismo teisėju pirmą kartą buvo paskirtas penkeriems metams, teisės būti paskirtam teisėju iki 65 metų. Nagrinėjama apylinkės teismo teisėjos atleidimo iš pareigų, pasibaigus penkerių metų kadencijai, byla. Analizuojami įvairių grandžių teismų – Lietuvos apeliacinio teismo, Lietuvos Aukščiausiojo Teismo, Konstitucinio Teismo – sprendimai byloje.The author of the article analyzes the constitutional doctrine of the dismissal of a judge from office upon the expiration of the term of powers. The author discusses the guarantees of the independence of courts and judges, one of which is the guarantee of the inviolability of the length of powers of judges. The previously valid Law on Courts used to provide that the President of the Republic could appoint a person as a judge of a local court when such an appointment is made for the first time, for a five-year term, and that upon the expiration of the five-year term, the President of the Republic could appoint such a person as a judge of a local court without examination or selection until the person reaches the age of 65. Under the Law on Courts valid at present, judges of all courts are appointed at once for the term until they reach 65 years of age. It is asserted in the article that the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania has not established the right of a person, who was for the first time appointed as a judge of a local court for a five-year term, to be appointed as a judge until he reaches 65 years of age. Upon the expiration of the five-year term, the person may expect to be appointed as a judge until he reaches 65 years of age, but he does not have the right to demand to be appointed as a judge until a specified time. Under the Constitution, while deciding whether to appoint such a person as a judge until he reaches 65 years of age, the President of the Republic enjoys broad discretion, i.e. he may also decide not to appoint such a person as a judge until he reaches 65 years of age and, what is more, he can decide not to appoint a person who has proved during the five-year term of office that he is completely capable of continuing the office of a judge. The author of the article discusses a case regarding the dismissal from office of a judge of a local court after the expiration of the five-year term of office. The decisions of the courts of various levels (of the Court of Appeal of Lithuania, the Supreme Court of Lithuania, the Constitutional Court) in this case are analyzed. An attempt is made to reason the fact that even in case a court of general jurisdiction decided that the advice of the Judicial Council to the President of the Republic not to appoint a person as a judge until he reaches 65 years of age is unlawful and unreasonable, it would not provide grounds to recognize the decree of the President of the Republic on dismissing the judge from office as being in conflict with the Constitution or the Law on Courts