Asking questions of the prosecutor general, if the questions are justified, is not objectionable and does not infringe the separation of powers per se, she added.

Speaking to Vikerraadio broadcast "Stuuios on peaminister" Wednesday, Kallas said: "What is clear is that clear there has been a lot of public criticism about the prosecutor's office's activities, but this [office] clearly belongs under the administration of the Ministry of Justice [auspices]. As a result, it is wholly normal that the Minister of Justice is interested in his own administration."

"He has really presented these questions. What is important is that the independence of the prosecutor's office must be ensured, while there must be no suspicion that anything other than the normal course of work is going on. While no politician should interfere in the substantive proceedings of any criminal case, this does not mean that detailed questions cannot be asked," Kallas continued.

Prosecutor General Andres Parmas had said last Thursday that the justice minister has been pressuring him to step down, and has systematically discredited the prosecutor's office via his actions.

Laanet has started the process for formally placing Parmas under supervision; the results of this will reveal whether there is any reason to escalate that by commencing disciplinary proceedings.

Laanet justified the step by saying there is cause to monitor the management quality of the prosecutor's office, and had pointed to a technical oversight in a high-profile official pensions case, and alleged complaints from some prosecutor's about the prosecutor general.

Kallas, a former lawyer, said that both she and the justice minister have been quizzed at the Riigikogu on proceedings or cases which are of great public interest, and at any time they do not have the information to hand, this is considered irregular.

While the independence of the prosecutor's office must be ensured, equally the justice minister must be granted the opportunity to take an interest in the activities of his administrative field, especially in a situation where there has been much public criticism of the prosecutor's office and its activities.

As to host Liisu Lass' question on whether Kalle Laanet had brought the independence of the prosecutor's office into question, or violated the principle of the separation of powers (a predominantly US concept, in terms of actual present day use, subtly different from the balance of powers as exists in the UK, and here referring to the separation of the judiciary and the executive branches – ed.), Kalls rejected this.

"Asking questions can certainly not be objectionable in any way," she responded.

Any official supervision can be justified when there are sufficient grounds for doing so, and this is what the law also says, that these grounds constitute checking the legality and expediency of the activities carried out by the prosecutor's office, Kallas added.

Laanet has not exceeded his competences and has not specifically interfered in the investigation she reiterated, repeating also the need to find a balance.

"We must not go where we reward those who do nothing - decline to t investigate anything, ask no questions," she went on, adding that the justice minister is responsible for providing answers to questions about any oversights in the prosecutor general's work.

"He has also told me sent the questions he intends to ask the prosecutor general," Kallas said.

"I have also asked the Minister of Justice what these allegations are, if he has put them before him and he claims he has," she continued.

Questions to the prosecutor general will be in written form, the prime minister said.

As to whether Kalle Laanet should step down, Kallas said that this was not necessary at this point, though qualified her words by saying: "In any case, the facts of the matter must be ascertained; what has happened one way or the other, so we can see what can be done about it," adding that the issue should not just be a case of "the work of the prosecutor's office could be better overall; how it can be done is a separate question."

Host Mirko Ojakivi asked Kallas if, had she been a former police officer or had worked in this field for a lengthy period of time, would she have kept the Ain Seppik and Elmar Vaher cases (which related to alleged pensions irregularities involving senior Police and Border Guard Board and other officials – ed.) at arm's length?

"I would do so," Kallas answered (Kalle Laanet is a former PPA official – ed.).

"Precisely for the reason that such charges could be made [if not doing so]. Whenever you have been involved in some field, the accusations that maybe you are not quite impartial here can arise from that point. So these things should definitely be avoided," Kallas went on, adding that she had put this to Minister Laanet too, who had said that he had been careful also to move aside potential conflicts of interest in such cases also.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and Twitter and never miss an update!