A well-known YouTuber must pay a fine for violating a ban on recording a hearing
On March 27th, 2025, the Supreme Administrative Court of the Slovak Republic, by resolution Case No. 32D/16/2023, imposed a fine of 500 euros on a well-known YouTuber. The reason was the making of an audio-visual recording of a public hearing despite a prior prohibition by the panel.
On November 20, 2024, a public hearing was held at the Supreme Administrative Court in the disciplinary case of Judge JUDr. Juraj Kliment. In order to ensure the proper conduct of the hearing, the president of the panel issued a measure prohibiting the making of visual or audiovisual recordings, and informed all attendees of this restriction. A well-known YouTuber who was present at the hearing requested that the panel decide on the admissibility of such recordings. The panel subsequently confirmed the president’s of the panel prohibition. After the hearing, the Supreme Administrative Court found that the YouTuber had violated the panel’s decision by not only making an audiovisual recording of the hearing, but also publishing it on YouTube and the social network Facebook. The recording was titled: ‘Judge Juraj Kliment is guilty. Journalist … demands a fine.’
The Supreme Administrative Court stated that the course of disciplinary judicial proceedings is governed by the Code of Disciplinary Procedure, which refers to the subsidiary application of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Code of Disciplinary Procedure does not specifically regulate whether visual or audiovisual recordings may be made during a hearing, including the public announcement of a decision. Therefore, when considering the admissibility of recordings during a hearing in disciplinary proceedings, it is necessary to proceed in accordance with the Code of Criminal Procedure. This code explicitly and without any exceptions prohibits the making of visual and audiovisual recordings during the main hearing, and the court itself is not authorized to permit such recordings.
The well-known YouTuber attended the hearing as a member of the public and was demonstrably informed of the decisions of the Supreme Administrative Court stating that making visual or audiovisual recordings of the hearing was not permitted. Nevertheless, he made such a recording and subsequently published it. The fact that he was aware of violating the court’s decision is further evidenced by the provocative title of the video: ‘… Journalist … demands a fine.’
The Supreme Administrative Court therefore proceeded to impose a fine pursuant to Section 253(11) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It considered the imposition of a fine necessary, with regard to its educational function, as it considered the behavior and actions of the well-known YouTuber unacceptable and contemptuous of the judiciary.
This decision was made by the President of the Panel No. 32D of the Supreme Administrative Court, JUDr. Anita Filová.
The YouTuber challenged the resolution by filing a constitutional complaint, which was rejected by the Constitutional Court of the Slovak Republic by resolution Case No. IV. ÚS 389/2025 on August 7th 2025.