SLOVAKIA SLOW ROLLS CORPORATE CRIMINAL LIABILITY

C O N F I D E N T I A L BRATISLAVA 000487

SIPDIS

STATE FOR EUR/CE, EUR/ERA, EEB

E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/20/2019
TAGS: PREL OECD LO
SUBJECT: SLOVAKIA SLOW ROLLS CORPORATE CRIMINAL LIABILITY
LEGISLATION

CLASSIFIED BY: Keith A. Eddins, Charge d'Affaires, a.i., State.

REASON: 1.4 (b),(d)

1. (U) On November 4, the Slovak government approved draft
legislation on terrorist financing. The accompanying
explanatory note caught our eye because it stated that `if the
proposed legislative changes creating separate offenses for
terrorism financing and corporate criminal liability were not
approved,' the Slovaks would be subject to a negative review
during the FATF (Financial Action Task Force) plenary in
February. Since the draft text contains no provisions on
Corporate Criminal Liability (CCL),we sought clarification from
the International Affairs Division of the Ministry of Justice.




2. (U) MOJ staff attorney Jana Vnukova explained on
November 19 that the Ministry had also submitted a draft on CCL,
but that the government had withdrawn it from the package before
it was approved. According to Vnukova, who has worked for over
a decade at the Ministry, there is no chance that the Slovak
Parliament will approve CCL legislation prior to the June 2010
elections.






3. (C) Vnukova (protected) stated clearly that Vladmir
Meciar's HZDS was vehemently opposed to CCL and that no relevant
legislation would be adopted while HZDS was a member of the
ruling coalition. When we reminded Vnukova of the long-standing
OECD requirement that Slovakia adopt a legal regime of corporate
criminal liability for bribery of foreign officials, she
lamented that Slovakia `looked very bad' in the OECD and was
lagging behind most of the region in meeting this requirement.




4. (U) We also learned that Prime Minister Fico has not yet
responded to the July letter of the Chairman of the OECD Working
Group on Bribery regarding this deficiency. In responses to the
OECD and to FATF regarding delays in enacting CCL or terrorism
financing legislation, Slovak officials continue to claim that
the main reason was the proceeding pending before the
Constitutional Court on the constitutionality of the Special
Court on Corruption. There was never any credible connection
between the fate of the Special Court and that of corporate
criminal liability legislation. But, even if there had been, the
case was decided in May. The Constitutional Court ruled that
the Special Court was unconstitutional.)







Comment




5. (C) The Slovak government's stance toward meeting its
OECD commitments is disappointing, but not surprising. The
government has provided misleading information to OECD partners
and it clearly has no intention of fulfilling those commitments
anytime in the near future. That the Prime Minister's office
has not even bothered to respond to the strongly worded letter
of the Chairman of the OECD WGB - sent months ago - is
indicative of the disdain with which this government treats
criticism. Preserving the space for corrupt practices appears
to be a higher priority than meeting these long-standing
international commitments.

EDDINS