Former Prime Minister Ivars Godmanis was questioned in a digital television criminal case involving Ainārs Šlesers (“Latvia in the first place”) and Andris Šķēle. Under his leadership, the government approved regulations that allowed Lattelecom to become an introducer of digital television. Godmanis emphasized in court that he trusted Sleser in this matter, lsm.lv reports.
The prosecutor’s office believes that Hannu Digital was artificially involved in the digital television project, which led to a fraud of about three million euros from Lattelecom. In 2009, Lattelecom acquired the right to provide digital television broadcasting with Hannu Digital equipment in the selection of applicants organized by the Ministry of Transport.
I don’t even know what Hannu Digital is. I don’t know such things, ”Godmanis said in the LT program” Panorama “.
It was the decisions of the government led by Ivars Godmanis that allowed Lattelecom and Hannu Digital to become the main implementers, although it was previously planned to entrust the implementation of digital television to the Latvian State Radio and Television Center (LVRTC).
That is why Godmanis was called last week to testify in a criminal case in which the then Minister of Transport and his party member Ainars Slesers were accused of fraud in a digital television project. “My principle in government is to trust my ministers. I have implemented this principle in several governments, “the former prime minister said in court.
Godmanis repeatedly pointed out in court that the nuances of the digital television implementation project did not go into depth. At the same time, Godmanis considers the result that Lattelecom became the implementer to be good: “The situation was very difficult. It was August, September. We changed the budget, and that’s it [digitālās televīzijas projekts] was not a priority process. I remember that. But
At the time when the Minister told me that Lattelecom had won, I was very satisfied.
[..] This option was, in my view, a success. The fact that something can be found there is no longer addressed to me. Forgiveness. ”
Prosecutor Monvīds Zelčs pointed out that Godmanis’ testimony was in line with the accusation, as it showed that it was the Ministry of Transport, under the leadership of Slesers, that was responsible for the regulation that led to the involvement of Hannu Digital. “Mr. Godmanis, like the rest of the government, which viewed these regulations of the Cabinet of Ministers, trusted what was directed to the Cabinet of Ministers by the Ministry of Transport headed by Slesers,” Zelčs pointed out.
On the other hand, Slesers interpreted Godmanis’ testimony differently: “The witness clearly stated that everything was right, that Lattelecom was the best winner, and there is no objection. But unfortunately the prosecutor is not satisfied with these answers. Therefore, this hysteria and this confusion, which is visible from the prosecutor’s office, because no witness has testified against Ainars Slesers to this day. “
Slesers also emphasized that by the time Lattelecom entered into an agreement with the Latvian State Radio and Television Center on the introduction of digital television, Godmanis’ government had already fallen. Consequently, even if there had indeed been fraud in the project, it would not have been Sleser’s responsibility. Meanwhile, the prosecutor stressed that all the main decisions that led to the involvement of Hannu Digital were made during Sleser’s time.
–
