Appearing on ETV politics head-to-head show "Esimene stuudio" Tuesday, Steven-Hristo Evestus (pictured), who was a prosecutor until 2018, said that the conflict between Laanet and Parmas gives the impression of being personal.

Evestus expressed his disappointment during the show over his expectations not coming to fruition that Laanet would justify his dissatisfaction with the Prosecutor's Office, expectations Evestus expressed during his last recent appearance on "Esimene stuudio" last week.

According to Evestus, the minister instead left a rather poor impression.

"I was hoping the minister would fill us in a bit on his dissatisfaction with the prosecutor's office, as these things are important to know, plus it's also crucial for a lawyer to find out, since, when you represent victim or suspects, you want to be aware if you can trust the Prosecutor's Office, or if it serves the interest of a 'person X' instead."

"I got a bad impression of the minister. I didn't get any convincing answers, and [the developments of the past week] deepened my impression that there might be some personal likes, dislikes, unspoken issues, problems behind it. But yes, I haven't been able to obtain a clear answer on what specifically we have to criticize the prosecutor's office over today," Evestus went on.

Evestus concurred with the head of state, President Alar Karis, who said the current scandal does not constitute a rule of law crisis in Estonia.

Evestus nonetheless said he believes that Laanet's actions are undermining the credibility and independence of the prosecutor's office. "In this regard, I would at least expect clear answers from the new justice minister."

Laanet's replacement has not yet been named.

The prosecutor general, Andres Parmas, recently said he had been logging his conversations with Laanet. Evestus said that while this is not prohibited by law, it is not standard procedure for prosecutors to do so in the course of their daily work. However, Evestus said thought Parmas might have done so out of a feeling of vulnerability.

Evestus said: "I fully understand we're all in the dark on how exactly these recordings took place, whether they involve notes or recordings." Parmas has said on one occasion another individual was present with him during a phone conversation with Laanet, and heard that conversation, adding that he had "made notes" on discussions held.

Evestus said: "I can say this much: Recording personal conversations, be it through notes or recordings with other individuals, is not prohibited by law. But I think if prosecutors start doing this in their day-to-day job, it's somewhat questionable, so I don't think it's okay."

"In this particular case, if something gets recorded, I believe the prosecutor general has felt himself to be in a very exposed position for a long period of time, which has led him to start documenting evidence just for his own defense."

The fact that at the height of the scandal, an article appeared in Eesti Ekspress on Laanet's renting an apartment in Tallinn from his stepson, both in his current role as justice minister and previously as Minister of Defense, and having those costs reimbursed by the state, raises questions for Evestus about whether anyone was aware of this before, and could have reacted earlier.

"I try not to view this with an innocent eye. This raises doubts for me – just the timing of it all, that information like this conveniently arrives in time for us all to see, at the end of the week of the escalation of the whole scandal. It raises questions about who, and at what level, was aware of this, whether it's possible that it came from someone who could have acted on the knowledge earlier," he went on.

The main issues around Laanet's state reimbursement for rental, perfectly legitimate in and of itself if a government member's main residence is outside of Tallinn, are the close relationship with the landlord (who is his wife's adult son from a previous relationship) and the sums involved over the years reimbursement was claimed (reported at €12,000).

"We are talking about a possible corruption case here. Our anti-corruption law is such that it obliges every one, at least public officials, to report cases of potential corruption. So if someone slept on this knowledge happily for months or years, then I think they have committed a sin in some sense and should actually take a look in the mirror. This indeed raises suspicions," the former prosecutor general went on.

Porto Franco case: Identifying a crime based on one piece of the jigsaw may not be successful

On another topic, on Monday of this week, the second-tier Tallinn Circuit Court overturned an earlier acquittal by the first-tier Harju County Court and issued a new verdict which found businessman Hillar Teder, former Secretary-General of the Center Party Mihhail Korb, plus the Center Party itself, guilty of influence peddling.

Evestus acknowledged that this might lead people to wonder how courts come to such widely divergent decisions.

"Indeed, this case is significant and gave us serious reason last year to doubt how the prosecutor's office does its work, meaning whether they go to court with an empty case file, or if there's something inside that should catch a judge's attention. But what did we get in response? It appeared to be an empty file, with no evidence found. Yet now, we're in a completely different situation, and it really makes me wonder how it's possible in court to have one kind of resolution at one moment, then a completely different one at another. This is not typical of criminal cases of this kind," Evestus said.

Evestus noted that a past similar scenario involving a land swap case, where the county court and the circuit court had widely differing viewpoints.

Evestus pointed out that the circuit court's decision in the Porto Franco case was not critical of the prosecutor's office, but rather of the county court.

"As for the approach of the county court, it turns out that the court did not take all evidence into consideration, making a selection instead. Perhaps to simplify further, it can be said that when we talk about corruption, economic crimes, their detection is indeed very complicated with many puzzle pieces on the table."

"If I pick up one piece from the table and try to identify a crime based on that single piece of the jigsaw, well then that may fail. This is what the circuit court has highlighted, indicating that in such cases, the evidence must be viewed with a bit broader perspective," Evestus said.

Evestus stressed that the circuit court's decision is not final and the dispute is likely to continue in the Supreme Court.

Evestus conceded that in cases of potential corruption, the dispensation of justice often includes the question of whether something is fundamentally credible.

"Typically, in proving such suspicions, it's not viable to gather evidence that explicitly states in a way that could lead to the conclusion that it involves bribery or the use of influence. And this [Porto Franco] court decision has referred several times to the need to assess the collection of evidence and furthermore, to assemble these pieces and see how logically they can be linked, and what conclusions can be reached from them. Along with this is often the operation inside the legal landscape of a sort of fundamental credibility, whether it seems fundamentally believable."

"This is indeed a subjective category, but it perhaps also introduces the perspective of an objective bystander; how these events seem to an observer, what the purpose of these actions is, what the motivation, the motive may be. This notion of fundamental credibility can sometimes accomplish much. I understand that this was also a significant argument," Evestus added.

Evestus stressed that one cannot convict someone in court based solely on the notion of fundamental credibility however; evidence is certainly still needed.

"What we've learned from this case is that, of course, a court can favor one side, be it the prosecution or the defense, as to whom it believes and trusts more, but it must not disregard any evidence and fail to connect it as required, and at least give some position on whether it is accepting or refuting [that evidence.]"

--

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