The action of the JVLMA Council, in pushing the issue of the removal of the rector from his position
The action of the JVLMA Council, in pushing the issue of the removal of the rector from his position
The team of the BDO Law law firm, defending the legal interests of Jāzeps Vītolas Latvian Music Academy (JVLMA) rector Guntars Prānis, managed to get the action of the JVLMA Council to be declared illegal in putting the issue of the rector's removal from office to a vote.
Namely, the JVLMA Academic Arbitration Court, as an institute delegated by the legislature, in its decision of April 12, 2024 evaluated the actions and decisions of the JVLMA Council, the existence of which the client learned only from the mass media. Both the actions of the JVLMA Council were recognized as illegal, and the unjustified decisions were annulled. Accordingly, the mentioned ruling proves that the narrative positioned in the public space about the JVLMA rector's inactivity does not correspond to the truth.
Jānis Zaļais, commenting on the decision of the JVLMA Academic Arbitration Court, stated: "In a country governed by the rule of law, 35 minutes cannot be called long-term discussions in which it is established that a person has committed inaction, if even this person has not been heard and the documentation submitted by him has not been assessed. Pleasing the mass media does not stand above the quality performance of one's duties. Also, this pleasure cannot be an excuse for spreading fictions offensive to the honor and dignity of another person”.
Namely, the JVLMA Academic Arbitration Court, as an institute delegated by the legislature, in its decision of April 12, 2024 evaluated the actions and decisions of the JVLMA Council, the existence of which the client learned only from the mass media. Both the actions of the JVLMA Council were recognized as illegal, and the unjustified decisions were annulled. Accordingly, the mentioned ruling proves that the narrative positioned in the public space about the JVLMA rector's inactivity does not correspond to the truth.
Jānis Zaļais, commenting on the decision of the JVLMA Academic Arbitration Court, stated: "In a country governed by the rule of law, 35 minutes cannot be called long-term discussions in which it is established that a person has committed inaction, if even this person has not been heard and the documentation submitted by him has not been assessed. Pleasing the mass media does not stand above the quality performance of one's duties. Also, this pleasure cannot be an excuse for spreading fictions offensive to the honor and dignity of another person”.