"The decision by the Supreme Court was expected, because the charges in this case do not meet the criteria for influence peddling," said Center Party defense attorney Oliver Nääs. "The county court correctly determined that there was no influence peddling and that no unjust agreement was made in the interests of Porto Franco."

"Moreover, based on the evidence examined in court, it is clear that Porto Franco was not given any unfair or unjustified advantage from Tallinn city government in connection with the disputed easement fee," he added.

Chief State Prosecutor Taavi Pern noted that the Supreme Court's decision to accept the case in no way indicates the Supreme Court's stance on the charges involved.

"The court can only form an opinion after evaluating the evidence," Pern said. "Only the highest court can shape legal precedent, and the fact that it is the Supreme Court that will provide the definitive assessment of the evidence and legal issues is welcomed."

The chief state prosecutor highlighted that the Porto Franco criminal case marked the first time in Estonia that a court found a political party guilty of a repeated crime committed during a probation period.

"This ruling sent the message that no one should gain an unfair advantage in dealings with the state or local government simply because they know or financially support someone," he explained.

"The circuit court agreed with the prosecution that Hillar Teder and Center Party representative Mihhail Korb had mutually agreed that in exchange for financial support to the party, the Center Party would leverage its influence over Tallinn Mayor Mihhail Kõlvart to resolve the easement issue in Porto Franco's favor," he continued.

"The Prosecutor's Office finds that Harju County Court initially delivered an acquittal because it overlooked several important pieces of evidence," Pern said. "We brought this to the attention of the circuit court, which, after thoroughly evaluating the evidence, concluded that the charges were fully substantiated. Since two tiers of courts have issued different rulings on the legal issues related to influence peddling, then it's only natural that the Supreme Court has accepted the Porto Franco criminal case."

Circuit court overturns county court acquittals

On March 18, Tallinn Circuit Court overturned the previous acquittal by Harju County Court in the Porto Franco case and issued a new verdict, finding Hillar Teder, former Center Party secretary general Mihhail Korb and the Center Party guilty of influence peddling.

The circuit court sentenced Teder to one year and five months in prison, specifying that his prison sentence would not be enforced in full if Teder does not commit a new intentional crime during a two-year probation period.

The court also sentenced Korb to one year and two months in prison, likewise specifying that his prison sentence would not be enforced in full if Korb does not commit a new intentional crime during two years of probation.

The Center Party, meanwhile, was sentenced to a pecuniary punishment of €750,000. The court then increased the punishment for the new offense by €250,000 – the amount still outstanding from a previous pecuniary punishment to which the party was sentenced by Harju County Court on September 5, 2019 – bringing the Center Party's aggregate punishment to a total of €1 million.

The second-tier court found that the existence of an influence peddling agreement dating back to February 9, 2020 had been established. To that end, the court found that the influence peddling agreement was sufficiently specific, meaning that the expected action had been determined and that this was not some sort of abstract agreement.

The court determined that the donation Teder had offered the Center Party was quid pro quo to Korb, who had promised to influence the mayor of Tallinn. Korb had also expressed acceptance of this so-called donation to that end. Thus, the parties had at least broadly agreed on how and toward what objective someone should start working, according to the ruling.

The court found that it had been proven that Teder had offered assets to the Center Party via senior party executive Mihhail Korb in exchange for Korb and the Center Party using their influence over the mayor to ensure that the Porto Franco development would be given an unjustified and unfair advantage in the public interest when applying for an easement with the Tallinn city government.

The court noted that an influence peddling agreement may but need not be explicit, adding that it can also be indirect, but that it must be objectively perceptible.

Tallinn Circuit Court found that on February 9, 2020, when Hillar Teder offered the Center Party the so-called donation during a meeting with party secretary general Mihhail Korb, such an agreement was unambiguously perceptible.

It found that in a situation where this would have been Teder's usual, meaning ideological, donation to the Center Party, there would have been no reason whatsoever to consider or contemplate that it not be associated with prior agreements. Likewise there would have been no need to use expressions of understanding after the donation was made.

Investigative weekly Eesti Ekspress noted at the time that this Tallinn Circuit Court was a pivotal one, as Harju County Court had fully acquitted all of the defendants in the case last fall because Judge Aime Ivanson, who presided over the trial at the time, believed that absolutely no influence peddling occurred whatsoever in connection with the Porto Franco development.

Korb, Teder and the Center Party's defense attorneys all appealed to have the Tallinn Circuit Court ruling finding them guilty in the Porto Franco case overturned.

--

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