Eva Kaili: The sums found by the Belgian police in the house of the former vice-president of the European Parliament, in her father’s suitcase and in the house of the Italian, former MEP, Pantzeri, are staggering.
The Belgian media published a Photo, from the country’s police who had undertaken the investigation into the corruption scandal in the European Parliament and the amount of money is… staggering.
It’s about 1.5 million euros, which were found in her home Eva Kaili and her partner, in her father’s suitcase, but also in the house of the Italian, former MEP, Pier Antonio Pancheri.
The photo of the money seized for Qatar Gate
The website information Le Soir they report that in the possession of the Italian, former MEP, Panther were found approx 600,000 euros. Given this, it follows that approx 900,000 euros was the money that the Belgian authorities found in the possession of Eva Cailis, her partner Francesco Giorgio, and her father, Alexandros Cailis.
The European Parliament dismissed Eva Kaili as vice-president
The decision to remove her was expected Eva Kaili from the position of vice-president of the European Parliament. The proposal of the Conference of Presidents to proceed with the process was accepted by the president Roberta Metzola made the relevant announcement.
“In view of the ongoing investigations, the European Parliament has decided that Eva Kaili is no longer one of its vice-presidents. This decision has immediate effect. We will continue to cooperate fully with the relevant national law enforcement and judicial authorities“, wrote Ms. Metsola characteristically.
What does Belgian law provide for cases like Qatar Gate
In analysis of the manner and rules by which it operates Belgian lawVassilis Bousis lawyer proceeded on Brusselsreferring to her case Eva Kaili and Qatar Gate.
Speaking to ERT, Mr. Bousis explained how “deprivation of liberty, as they say here in Belgium, begins with the arrest made by a policeman of every citizen. When this arrest is made, we have 48 hours in which the investigator must issue the arrest warrant. This arrest warrant, which must be issued within 48 hours and is a demanding limit, i.e. even one minute to be late, means that the procedure has not been followed and the citizen or the suspect can be released.”
Given this arrest warrant within 48 hours, there is another process after that, because this arrest warrant has a validity of five working days. Therefore, this arrest warrant must be put before a judicial board, which within five working days must consider whether the arrest warrant is valid or not.
According to Mr. Bousi, “in the judicial council there is a judge, who will have the last word. There is also the prosecutor. The prosecutor is the one who asks the court to approve the warrant issued by the investigator, and in this judicial council of course the investigator participates, who will make a report of what he has done so far in his investigation. Well, when someone is called to go to this Judicial Council, they have the opportunity one working day before going to this Council to study the file together with their lawyer.”
Therefore, if Mrs. Kaili goes to this tomorrow judicial council, means that today from 8:30 am when the secretariat opens, her lawyers and she will be able to have access, until the time the secretariat closes, to the file and tomorrow the matter of Mrs. Kaili will be considered.
As the lawyer explains, until now they have not had access to the file, all they know is why he is accused. “Because they are probably suspected in the first instance and possibly charged later.”
“So the general rule is that the file is accessed one working day before the suspect goes to the judicial council”he emphasized.
As for her subject possible pretrial detentionhe mentioned that: “It’s completely different here. First of all, tomorrow’s court will examine whether the law was formally observed, that is, the deadlines, whether the warrant was issued within 48 hours, etc., etc. Since these have been observed and I believe that with the experience that the investigators now have here, I must say that I don’t imagine that there is such an issue in such a case. They will simply consider whether it is possible to release the suspect and under what circumstances we can do so. If there is no problem or there is no possibility that this suspect will violate the investigation that is done in what way, either by removing some evidence, or by having some contact with other suspects. I imagine that in this particular case they will not decide to release each suspect, because the investigation is ongoing.”
As for the possibility of there being detention decision he mentioned that “if the judicial council decides to detain any third party, either Ms. Kaili or someone else, they have the opportunity to file an appeal within 24 hours of the decision being rendered. This appeal will be heard within 15 working days and the decision should be issued within this period. If of course they decide that someone is released, it ends there. But if they decide not to release the suspect, then this decision has a new validity for one month.”
About them conditions for releaseexplained that there is no general rule. “It depends on the court. He can release someone without restrictive conditions or he can set restrictive conditions or even what we call a bracelet. I imagine that if someone is released without conditions, it means that the authorities are not afraid of him disappearing.”
Commenting on it whether the existence of the minor child can play a role in not detaining Ms. Kaili or her partner, said that: “I find it a bit difficult to be the only argument. It may be an argument that the defense of the lady and her partner will assert. I don’t know how much this depends on what the folder contains of course, but just because there is a child. I don’t think it will be able to influence a release decision.”
Finally, speaking of the possible charges which will be formulated for the penalties corresponding, as in the cases of bribery, money laundering and participation in a criminal organization, Mr. Bousis stated that “Right now it’s a little premature to talk about penalties because we don’t know exactly what’s in the file.”
“The penalties provided for are very theoretical, in the sense that, for example, for forming and participating in a criminal organization, the penalty depends on what action each person has within this formation, i.e. he has a leadership role, he does not have a leadership role, so without knowing exactly what’s in the file, it’s a little hard to predict the penalties, but there’s definitely a prison sentence. I read that they say three to five years, possibly more or less.”he said.
And he added that “all those found for money laundering, the money, etc. will be confiscated, but other elements of the property may also be confiscated, as long as it is proven that they come from these actions, for which the justice is concerned.”
Related news
Eva Kaili: The European Parliament officially dismissed her as vice-president
What does Belgian law provide for cases like Qatar Gate
Politico on Qatar Gate: “A Few Bad Apples or the Whole Barrel?”
