The prosecutor general has been facing pressure from the minister to resign, sparking controversy, including over where the dividing line on judicial independence from the executive and legislature lies.

In the case of one phone call between Laanet and Parmas, a third party was present who overheard the conversation, the latter said in an interview given to ERR which follows in its entirety.

How did you document your conversations with Justice Minister Laanet? Did you use any specific tech solutions to achieve this?

By writing notes on paper, via a smartphone, and on computer.

Did you notify the minister beforehand that you were recording your conversation? If not, why not?

In the course of my regular work practice, I make notes on important conversations and have not felt the need to specifically notify [the interlocutor] of this.

In the context of the justice minister placing an unusual amount of pressure on me to resign from the prosecutor general position, my desire was to document criticisms, demands, and assessments put to me, as accurately as possible. First and foremost, this was intended for my personal use in private professional communication, to factually represent these claims and their unusual mode of expression.

How have these documents/recordings been saved? Can they be reproduced?

The notes are still available.

Speaking to Raadio Kuku, you said: 'If we had a phone conversation, I wasn't always the sole recipient alone.' What does that mean exactly? Was someone accompanying you during these recordings? Who was it, and what was their role?

This means that during the course of a call, another person was present with me, and who heard what had been said. I do not consider it appropriate to divulge the names or positions of these individuals at this time, as they are not interested in gaining any attention.

Would it be possible for ERR to obtain these recordings?

I do not have any recordings to share with ERR.

Considering the current lack of clarity and overall lack of trust, do you plan to make these recordings public at any point?

Again, I do not have recordings to share with the public. I am ready to share the documented information first and foremost with the relevant independent institutions, such as an investigative commission.

I also stress that the context of mistrust and confusion you referred to began with last Wednesday's article in Eesti Päevaleht, when the prosecution, the Estonian public and myself found out that the justice minister was considering commencing disciplinary proceedings against me.

Furthermore, in the ensuing days, I learned, via the media, about the minister's fundamentally altered positions and the intention to start a supervisory procedure.

Unfortunately, the current public discourse is neither beneficial to the prosecution nor to the ministry.

However, given the vagueness and contradictory nature of the minister's criticisms, as the country's prosecutor general I cannot remain silent, as not only do I feel the unfair pressure, but so too does the prosecution as a whole.

Despite this tense past week, my hope is that after the initial emotions have subsided, it will be possible to resolve the situation with dignity and according to the principles of a state which employs the rule of law. Estonia is a rule-of-law-based state, where the principles of separation of powers and the independence of the prosecution apply.

Editor's note: ERR mentioned in their interview request that Parmas' statement on Raadio Kuku, to the effect that "I have recorded conversations with Laanet, but I cannot specify how," has in fact led to further confusion, speculation, and charges.

For this reason, clarifying what happened is prudent for the sake of overall clarity and for the credibility of the prosecution office - Urmet Kook.

--

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