The Magical Nokia-box - part 22.

What decision was given at first instance?

After the prosecution admitted that they had committed mistakes and the charges related to the Nokia-box had been dropped, Hagyó was imposed two-year suspended sentence. However, he was not found guilty in connection with the Nokia-box and the metro line 4, furthermore the charge of being involved in criminal organization was also dropped. Since the ex Deputy Lord Mayor is still pleading his innocence the responsible defence lawyers have appealed the decision and the case goes to the court of second instance.

What were the antecedents of the decision?

The last witness was heard in September, 2015 in the BKV case. However, even after the case took more unexpected turns. In the last moment the prosecution amended the indictment again basically eliminating the count related to the Nokia-box.

It was a lie, however it contributed to the two-third - atv.hu

According to the lawyer of Miklós Hagyó, ex-Deputy Lord Mayor of the socialist party - having been sentenced to suspended imprisonment – there is a direct twofold connection between the Nokia-box, the memento of the BKV-scandal reaching its peak during the parliamentary election period in 2010 and the win of the currently governing parties with two-third majority. According to the election expert answering to our questions the corruption case did contribute to the uncertain voters’ deciding for the right-wing.

Based on the sentence passed by the court of first instance at the beginning of the week none of the accused in the Hagyó-case has to go to prison, what is more some of them are entitled to bring an action for damages. Three of the four charges against the first accused, former Deputy Lord Mayor, have been dismissed by the court. However, for abuse of authority and breach of fiduciary duty he has been sentenced to tow-year imprisonment suspended for four years.

The nokia box story is over

The BKV case continued in Kecskemét with the screening of the confrontation between Miklós Hagyó and Zsolt Balogh on September 14, 2010. Zsolt Balogh after the hearing said: he felt that he could only stay released if he says incriminatory about Miklós Hagyó. Hagyó never ordered him into any outlawry; respectively he never gave him any money.

Before the court viewed the record in closed circle, András Kádár, the lawyer of the former deputy lord mayor asked the resume of the verdict from the European Court of Human Rights from Strasbourg in the case between Hagyó and Hungary. 

State Audit Office of Hungary

Here you can find documents directly and indirectly related to the audit of Hagyó Miklós' deputy mayoral office and administration. The audit was conducted by the SAOH while Hagyó was in pretrial detention.




Legal Summary of criminal procedure initiated upon the denunciation of the State Audit Office against Miklós Hagyó.

The Handó record is secret for 10 years

The voice record which was made on the closed doors hearing of the president of the National Judicial Office is not public for 10 years. The Constitutional Court only published the epitome of the record on their website. From this not a lot is coming out: according to the epitome of the record Handó mostly was talking about the overloaded situation of the courts. 


(Photo Source: nepszava.hu)

As we already reported, Handó Tünde, the president of the NJO – wife of Szájer József, who is a Fidesz party representative in the European Parliament – had to account for her power about the case transferences in front of the board. According to the order of the Constitutional Court’s standing orders the voice record is a „secret” for 10 years. The order says: about the hearings they made voice records, which will be provision by the Secretary for 10 years, „the voice record is not public until the time of the provision”. Our paper is trying to get the record from the board in the form of public interest data application. 

Decision from the European Court of Human Rights in 2013

CASE OF HAGYÓ v. HUNGARY
(Application no. 52624/10)

JUDGMENT

STRASBOURG
23 April 2013

This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.

Application to the European Court of Human Rights from Miklós Hagyó in 2010

The applicant, Mr Miklós Hagyó, is a Hungarian national who was born in 1967 and lives in Budapest. He is represented before the Court by Mr A. Kádár, a lawyer practising in Budapest.

Tomorrow Handó can explain herself

Tomorrow the Constitutional Court is going to hear Tünde Handó, the president of the National Judical Office with the coherence of Hagyó and his partner´s complaint of the constitutional right. The main point of the complaint is that the BKV-case were transposed to the Court of Kecskemét so what has proved it´s political prejudice at the Zuschlag-case, that there was no remedy chance against the verdict. 

According to András Kádár lawyer´s relation, the hearing from incomrehensible causes is gonig to happen with the lock-out of the public and the concerneds.

In the Hungarian claim history up to this point apropos of this unprecedented occasion, we had traversed the main points of the case, and Tünde Handó´s previous statements about the practice of the suit transfers.


(Photo source: nepszava.hu)

Tünde Handó, wife of József Szájer Fidesz-party EP-representator was lifted to the president chair of the OBH by the parliament in 13 of december in 2012, and she is practicing her power from 1 of january, 2012. That day the new constitution came into effect, what is together with the fundamental law's provisions makes enable Tünde Handó to decide about the questions of the court appointment.

Hagyó case: Handó stands in front of the Constitutional Court

The Constitutional Court will question/hear Handó Tünde, the president of the National Judicial Office with the coherence of the transportation of the Hagyó case to the Kecskemét Tribunal – found out our newspaper. 


The reason of the questioning/hearing in front of the Constitutional Court next to others, the proposal from Hagyó Miklós (former deputy lord mayor) and his lawyer to the Constitutional Court, in where they disapproved that the wife of Szájer József (who is a Fidesz party representative in the European Parliament) decided to transfer the BKV case to the Kecskemét Tribunal, without the support of the right for the remedy/legal redress.

Tünde Handó

Hagyó Miklós wants to be in the questioning/hearing on the 23th of April, but it’s not sure that he will have an opportunity - answered to our question Kádár András, the lawyer of the former deputy lord mayor. In addition – he continued – in Hagyó’s personal participation there can be two obstructions. One of them is that on that day Hagyó has to be in Kecskemét in the hearing of the BKV case but he trusts in that the court will allow this „outgoing” for him. The other question that this questioning/hearing really going to be public. If not, then Hagyó wants to wait in the hall of the Constitutional Court while they’re asking the main judge about his case – told Kádár. The lawyer is waiting excitedly the questioning/hearing, because the standing orders of the Constitutional Court doesn’t say that what is happening on an event like this. 

BKV case: the prosecution quipped to the Népszava

BKV case: the prosecution quipped to the Népszava

The prosecution disapproved the latest report of the Népszava on the Thursday’s hearing of the Hagyó case on the Kecskemét Tribune. We wrote that on the hearing of the former BKV leader who gave opinions about the contracts what were signed at the time of the main defendant of the case, Hagyó Miklós (former deputy lord mayor), it turned out that the witness of the prosecution agreed her testimony with the present leader of communication at the BKV.

We also reported that the prosecution made the witness to give back the glucose (candy) what she got from Hagyó Miklós, because according to the prosecution it can be suitable to have the “sympathy pique” of the witness.

According to the prosecution the published article which came out during the break of the hearing could influence the witness with the comments of our article what they criticized and the similar phenomenon’s can effect in the future that the witnesses will pick their words. However the defendants – from them occasionally Hagyó – continually communicate, they socialize/touch with the reporters who are in the hearing, the prosecution thinks that behind the writing which can influence the witnesses is „Hagyó’s impact”.

Kádár András, the lawyer of Hagyó Miklós on the hearing indicated that he feels a twin standard in the observation of the prosecution. „They labeled my protégée as the number one public enemy, they outraged him in the nation media, but in that time they didn’t take the stand” – drafted the lawyer.

Kádár also remembered, that the character of the Népszava report, whom the prosecution disapproved of, the BKV leader who was heard as a witness wanted to be in the media herself, because she signaled in the crossfire of the cameras and of the photographers that they can make pictures and sound recording of her and she allows the usage of the records. 

The BKV case after the interact, continued with the hearing of the witnesses about what henceforward we will report – without bias, according to the letters of the records what is available on the internet (www.hagyomiklos.com). 

On Thursday’s hearing on the court they heard 3 leaders of companies what were signed for BKV’s PR communication tasks. According to the indictment the contracts were unneeded and unsubstantiated. After the Népszava, the prosecution had to hang up in their witnesses too, because according to them the BKV was unable to do it by itself, as the indictment said.

Népszava-information

Source: http://www.nepszava.hu/articles/article.php?id=629894

The European Court of Human Rights Remains Silent

According to a December 14^th, 2012 post from the Hungarian blog Hagyó Dosszié, a complaint filed to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and the Hungarian Constitutional Court from the defendants in the trial of the BKV associates is still under review.

The suspects and their lawyers attested the transfer of the trial from the capital city Budapest to the Kecskemét Tribunal.  This has been a controversial occurrence in the trial because Kecskemét is generally considered to be politically sympathetic to the prosecutors.

According to András Kádár, the lawyer of defendant number one Miklós Hagyó, the transfer has damaged the integrity of the case and abused the defendants’ rights.  Kádár also complained about the lack of transparency in the transfer process.

I’ve written other posts about the transfer to the Kecskemét Tribunal which can be readhere, here, and here.


Source: http://thehagyocase.wordpress.com/ 

October 25th Hearing: The Charges Against Hagyó Remain

During the October 25th, 2012 hearing of the Budapest Public Transport Company (BKV) trial the lawyer of primary defendant Mr. Miklós Hagyó unsuccessfully proposed the removal of the accusations from the the formal indictment against Hagyó.

The lawyer, Mr. András Kádár, did so on the basis that these accusations were made by Mr. Zsolt Balogh, another defendant in the BKV case, who has already stated in formal testimony that his verbal incrimination was falsely given under controversial circumstances during his pretrial interrogation.

Balogh, who served as the interim chief executive of BKV in 2008, publicly stated in 2010 during a March 6th interview with Magyar Nemzet and a March 8th interview with HírTV that he was coerced into passing 70 million forints of BKV funds (just over $324,000.00 at time of writing) to Hagyó.  Of the that amount, 15 million were hidden inside a Nokia mobile telephone box which, according to Balogh, was personally exchanged between the two men on one occasion.

According to the formal indictment, Hagyó used the 70 million forints for personal and political gains.

Meanwhile, Balogh faces charges of involvement in a criminal organization in relation to his  alleged involvement of the misappropriation of the public funds.


Source: http://thehagyocase.wordpress.com/2012/12/17/october-25th-hearing-the-charges-against-hagyo-remain/

They rejected the proposal of Hagyó’s lawyer

They rejected the proposal of Hagyó’s lawyer

The court rejected the proposal of Hagyó’s lawyer, so they are not reflect/ponder in the BKV trial in Kecskemét the statements which are incriminatory against the former deputy lord mayor. These statements were said by the former leader of BKV Balogh Zsolt, who is also a defendant, he said these statements in the media earlier, these are paradox, and he already renounced them.

(Photo Source: hagyodosszie.blog.hu)

Even so it’s still the part of the indictment – in the case of Hagyó it’s the basis of the indictment – attracted the court’s attention Kádár András lawyer, with the proposal, that the council in this case reflect/ponder, make Balogh’s statements to the part of the trial, because those are paradox and partly they variance the investigation documents. The court even so rejected the request.

From Balogh – now traversed – statements the most known is the Nokia-box story. The former asked CEO of the BKV in his interview on the 6th of March, 2010 to the Magyar Nemzet and then two days later to the HírTV he stated that on divers occasions, all in all they passed 70 million forint corrupt money to Hagyó, from this 15 million was in person, in a Nokia box. All of this is interesting because with the checking/adding the event’s dates what Balogh said, these dates order, Hagyó’s supposed orders and these order’s subject, his statements during the investigation and in the media, without any particular analisys the variances are conspicouous.

Hagyó’s defender feels/thinks, it’s not really square, that these serious charges are just based on variance statements by the counsel. According to Kádár András, the counsel would have afford to try to prove these with other evidences, and at all to try to check it if Balogh’s statements were true or not. It has a great importance that the court rank Balogh as a trustworthy, and they think his statements are true, and it’s in accordance with other information – attracted the attention the lawyer. According to him, he thinks that the court should reflect/ponder all the statements of Balogh, because the former CEO didn’t maintain his investigation testimony, and in the hearing he kept silence about the Nokia-box.

Hagyó’s defender knows, usually in a hearing they are not review newspaper articles, interviews. The counselor reasoned with that when Balogh gave the interviews, he didn’t pronounce his opinion, said facts under the scope of the criminal procedure, so he wasn’t warned with the legal effect of the false testimony. The lawyer thinks that the reasoning of the counsel is logical, but he thinks, that in this special case the court could have deflect/diverge from this, because this is not prohibited with anything. According to Kádár András, it can be played that „we’ll close our eyes and we can act as we didn’t know about these interviews, but the fact will be fact, that a person, whose trustworthiness could have been the stable point for the counsel’s charge is not trustworthy.”

Source: http://www.nepszava.hu/articles/article.php?id=594821

Original:

Elutasították Hagyó ügyvédjének indítványát

Címkék: hagyó miklós balog zsolt bkv per vallomás kecskemét | Szerző: Hagyó Dosszié | 7:11 am

Elutasította a bíróság Hagyó Miklós ügyvédjének indítványát, így nem mérlegelik a Kecskeméten zajló BKV-perben azokat a volt főpolgármester-helyettesre nézve terhelő kijelentéseket, amelyeket a szintén vádlott Balogh Zsolt volt BKV-vezér a médiában tett korábban, viszont ellentmondásosak, ráadásul a tárgyaláson már vissza is vonta őket.

(Kép Forrás: hagyodosszie.blog.hu)

Ennek ellenére azok a vádirat részét - sőt Hagyó esetében a vádak alapját - képezik - hívta fel a bíróság figyelmét Kádár András ügyvéd, indítványozva, hogy az eljáró tanács mérlegelje, tegye a tárgyalás anyagává Balogh kijelentéseit, azok ugyanis ellentmondásosak és részben ellentmondanak a nyomozati iratoknak is. A bíróság ennek ellenére elutasította kérését.

Balogh - most kifogásolt - állításai közül a legismertebb az elhíresült Nokia-dobozos történet volt. Az egykori megbízott BKV-vezérigazgató 2010 március 6-án a Magyar Nemzetnek, majd két nappal később a HírTV-nek adott interjújában azt állította, hogy több alkalommal, összesen mintegy 70 millió forintnyi korrupciós pénzt juttatott el Hagyónak, ebből 15 milliót személyesen, egy telefonos dobozban. Mindez azért érdekes, mert egybevetve egymással Baloghnak az események időpontjára, azok sorrendjére, a Hagyó állítólagos utasításainak tartalmára és tárgyára vonatkozó, a nyomozás során illetve a médiában tett kijelentéseit, részletes elemzés nélkül is szembetűnőek az ellentmondások.

Hagyó védője úgy véli, nem teljesen tisztességes, hogy súlyos vádakat pusztán egymásnak ellentmondó állításokra alapoz az ügyészség. Kádár András szerint az ügyészségnek módjában állt volna, hogy egyéb bizonyítékokkal próbálják azokat alátámasztani, és egyáltalán megpróbálja ellenőrizni, hogy Balogh állításai igazak-e, vagy sem. Nagy jelentősége van annak, hogy Baloghot a bíróság szavahihetőnek minősíti-e, állításait hitelesnek, az egyéb információkkal összhangban lévőnek tekinti-e - hívta fel a figyelmet az ügyvéd. Szerinte azért is kellene a bíróságnak mérlegelni Balogh minden nyilatkozatát, mert a volt cégvezető nyomozati vallomását nem tartotta fenn, a tárgyaláson a Nokia-dobozról hallgatott.

Hagyó védője tudja, általában nem szoktak újságcikkeket, interjúkat ismertetni a tárgyaláson. Az ügyész azzal érvelt, amikor Balogh az interjúkat adta, nem a büntetőeljárás hatálya alatt nyilvánított véleményt, közölt tényeket, így nem figyelmeztették a hamis vallomás jogi következményeire. Az ügyész érvelését az ügyvéd ugyan logikusnak tartja, ám úgy véli, ebben a speciális helyzetben a bíróság ettől eltérhetett volna, mivel ezt amúgy semmi nem tiltja. Kádár András szerint el lehet játszani, hogy "becsukjuk a szemünket és úgy teszünk, mint akiknek ezekről az interjúkról nincs tudomásuk, de attól még az a tény tény marad, hogy egy ember, akinek a hitelessége az ügyészi vád szilárd pontja lenne, az nem szavahihető."

NÉPSZAVA-információ

A (from the scope of basic constitutional rights) special case?

Despite the fact that according to the law in our country everyone is equal , the practice shows that today there are ,,less equals." Our current basic law - similar to our pre-existing constitution - listed in basic constitutional rights the rights of fair trial to which everyone is equally entitled. 

Of course, this fundamental principle of law does not foresee any exceptions, because such a sentence is declared in a democratic constitutional state under the Basic Law would create astonishment. Thus the so-called priority issues of the Basic Law does not consider from the scope of ,, priority " The BKV case of the third-order suspects, Miklós Hagyó case however questioned by experienced this apparently obvious conclusion.




Atmospheric preparation of a criminal prosecution: