SLOVENIA WORKING TO ADDRESS FINNISH ALLEGATIONS IN

C O N F I D E N T I A L LJUBLJANA 000196

SIPDIS

STATE FOR EEB/EPPD, EEB/IMA, EUR/CE; COMMERCE FOR KATHRYN
NICKERSON

E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/16/2019
TAGS: ECON OECD EFIN SI
SUBJECT: SLOVENIA WORKING TO ADDRESS FINNISH ALLEGATIONS IN
OECD WORKING GROUP ON BRIBERY

REF: 2008 LJUBLJANA 407

Classified By: CDA Brad Freden, Reasons 1.4 (b,d)

Summary
--------------


1. (C) After discussions with Slovenia's Minister of Justice
and Chief Prosecutor-General about Finnish allegations
circulated at the June OECD Working Group on Bribery, post
expects Finland and Slovenia will clear up the
misunderstandings that gave rise to the allegations in
September - before the next meeting in October. Slovenia
continues to take steps to address OECD Anti-Corruption and
bribery concerns. End Summary.


2. (C) Slovenian Prosecutor General Barbara Brezigar and ADCM
met on July 9 at Brezigar's request as she wished to refute
allegations made in a Finnish note distributed to all OECD
members at an OECD Working Group on Bribery on June 17, when
the Slovenian delegation was not present. The allegations
stem from a case of possible bribery and/or corruption during
the sale of Finnish defense contractor Patria armored
vehicles to Slovenia. She noted that on June 19, Slovene
representatives discussed the allegations and that the U.S.
had asked serious questions about the allegations, but the
Finnish delegation was not present. Justice Minister Ales
Zalar told ADCM on July 17 the fact that that the Finnish and
Slovenian delegations were not present at the same time meant
that they did not have the chance to discuss the matter
openly and to clarify the issues. The Working Group
Secretariat had asked the Finnish delegation to submit a
written text of its concerns.


3. (C) Brezigar was very upset about the allegations made
about her and Slovenia and said she had sent a note of
protest to Finnish Minister of Justice and Prime Minister.
Although post has not seen the Finnish note, Brezigar
explained that it alleged problems with Slovenian
prosecutors, judges and legislation and included the claim
that "the head of the Slovenian prosecution service has close
ties with parties involved in the investigation." According
to press reports, the Finnish reproached Slovenia for failure
to cooperate with the investigation of suspected bribery,
citing Slovenian delays in conducting the probe, e.g., taking
eight months to conduct the first house searches, as well as
contacts between the prosecutor general and people involved
in the probe. She explained that in June 2008 Finland,
Austria, and Slovenia had formed a joint investigatory team
to look into the case. She noted that the competent
authorities were different in Finland and Slovenia: the
police in Finland and the prosecution service in Slovenia.
She had assigned a senior prosecutor from the organized crime
group as Slovenia's representative on the team. Brezigar
stressed that there was ongoing cooperation. She noted that
the case was still in its early stages: people were in
detention in Finland, which had lesser grounds for detention,
but the Finnish police had not yet passed the case to the
prosecutors and a criminal complaint had not yet been filed.


4. (C) Zalar said he received a letter from Finnish Minister
of Justice Tuija Brax assuring him that the purpose of the
June 17 note was not to jeopardize or harm Slovenia's
accession process. Brax and Zalar had agreed to meet before
the next Working Group session in October to clarify
Slovenia's positions and/or to withdraw Finnish allegations.
The OECD would facilitate this meeting, which would likely be
in early September. According to Zalar, Brax had written
that the Finnish allegations were submitted by
representatives of the Finnish police, not the prosecutors or
Ministry of Justice (the Ministry of Justice official had
signed off on the note, but the police had prepared it).
Zalar explained that the differences in procedure and
authorities had resulted in misunderstandings. He gave
several examples: different roles/authorities of police and
prosecutors -- in Finland the police are totally autonomous,
whereas in Slovenia the prosecutors instruct the police about
the investigation; different rules of procedure -- Finland
had the impression that Slovenia was leaking information, but
in Slovenia anybody accused of a crime has the right to see
the file and all of its documents. Zalar expressed confidence
that the two sides would be able to clear up the
misunderstandings and urged the U.S. not to attach too much
significance to the Finnish note.


5. (SBU) Slovenia's 2006 contract with Patria worth 278

million euro hit the headlines three weeks before Slovenia's
September 2008 national elections when Finnish broadcaster
reported that Patria distributed approximately 21 million
euro in bribes to Slovenian officials, including then PM
Jansa. Jansa vehemently denied the allegations and has
claimed that the scandal cost him the election. On July 16,
Slovenian prosecutors filed a criminal case of slander
against the Finnish journalist.

Comment
--------------


6. (C) We have no way of determining the veracity of the
bribery charge against Jansa and his associates. Most people
familiar with the business practices of the Slovenian
Ministry of Defense under the Jansa government find the
charges plausible, however, investigators have yet to uncover
a smoking gun. The Finnish note does not address the
underlying bribery charges, but rather charges about
Slovenia's procedural investigation. The Slovenian
government considers the charges based on misunderstandings
and is making every effort to clear them up.
FREDEN