SLOVAKIA: The Kočner case – court failure?

The Slovak court acquitted Marian Kočner of the lawsuit concerning the order for the murder of journalist Ján Kuciak and his partner Martina Kušnírová. Literally a storm broke out on social networks, which marks the Slovak court as bought.

First of all, on the essential issue concerning the fault of Marian Kočner. We have information only from the media, which has never once questioned Kočner’s guilt and created a relatively simple story for all of us who follow it. Ján Kuciak wrote about Kočner’s activities and Kočner tried to silence him, first with threats and later by ordering his murder. The story presented in this way does not allow any “buts”. You could actually say that the media condemned Kočner a long time ago.

But then there is a body of evidence that the prosecution must present to the court, and this evidence must unquestionably testify to the guilt of the defendants. After all, the killer confessed to the act and was already convicted. The punishment of potential murderers was now at stake, and the court concluded that the evidence presented by the prosecution was not indisputable. According to the judge who presided over the court, it was she who tended to believe that the evidence convicting Kočner was sufficient, while her two associate judges voted against, and therefore Kočner was acquitted.

Now I will not forgive one turn. Few of the debaters under the “shocking court decision” recall that the court should not listen to the opinion of the people, but to the state of evidence. I would paraphrase one opinion as follows: Not only public opinion, which does not doubt guilt, is enough to decide on guilt, but evidence. Otherwise, we would find ourselves again in a situation where the political order is sufficient for anyone to be convicted.

In this context, I am thinking of the case of Petr Nečas, the prime minister, who got involved with his subordinate, took her hand and got into the search engine of the police and public prosecutors sometime in 2011/12. In 2013, after a well-known police night action, he was accused of bribery, resigned his position relatively quickly, and the political map of the Czech Republic literally experienced an earthquake. Now, seven years after the police intervention in the Government Office, a verdict has been handed down that Nečas did not commit any bribery (these are so-called newsagents for three ODS deputies who did not want to approve government measures and allegedly resigned in exchange for lucrative positions in state bodies). Although the police and the public prosecutor’s office assessed Nečas’s conduct as bribery, the court ruled that such an act did not happen. Of the whole case, only untaxed gifts for Nečas’s current wife are at stake. A bit of a weak result for the work of the police and prosecutors, don’t you think?

The Slovak president and prime minister (who admitted to copying his dissertation in bulk, and at the same time stood at the head of the “revival process” of Slovak politics!) Are also surprised by the court’s decision, considering it only “temporary” and believing, like the plaintiff, that the superior court will decide “better”.

I also consider the complaint of the parents of the victims, who consider the court’s decision to be cowardly, to be extremely problematic, because the members of the court senate are “afraid of Kočner”. According to this decision, journalistic organizations even call the Slovak judiciary completely “corrupt”. At the same time, nothing is so distant from reality. The two judges who voted for the release of Kočner must have known that their opinion would literally trigger a whirlwind of criticism. It was enough to be for Kočner’s imprisonment and they would have peace from the media.

Personally, I consider Kočner’s participation in the murder of a journalist to be very probable. The plaintiffs thus apparently should not have relied so much on a “clear link between Kočner and the murderers”, but should have gathered such evidence, albeit indirect, that the judicial panel would not leave any doubt. They must have been aware of the inadequacy of their evidence as they tried to complete the evidence at the last minute.

If the superior court accepts further evidence against Kočner and decides against him, then the rule of law works. We certainly would not want to live in a state where only public opinion is enough to condemn. We would be no different from countries where fabricated charges in the style of the execution of Milady Horáková after the communist coup in 1948 or a recent decision by Chinese courts under the supervision of local communists are enough to convict them. The court should not fulfill the political orders of governments and presidents, but respect the law.

Postscript: The German daily Die Welt called Slovakia a mafia state. Maybe they know something about the Slovak prime minister and president that we have no idea about.

Taken with the permission of the author from JanBarton.blog.idnes.cz

–