The headlines in national newspapers over the past few days proclaimed: "Police Tapped Telephone Calls Made by President Václav Klaus" and "President Demands Resignation of Chief of Police." The fact that some of the president's phone calls were monitored by the police certainly seems shocking. However, it turns out the police were tapping calls made by one Ranko Pecič, who was being monitored in connection with an alleged privatization fraud way back in the 1990s. Mr. Pecič, a "close friend" of Klaus' for many years, is apparently also a friend and collaborator of individuals who are now the subject of a police investigation. So, shouldn't we be shocked by the company Mr. Klaus keeps?

Some are now angry that the police can, allegedly, monitor "almost anyone's" telephone calls with impunity. Britské Listy published the testimony of a police officer from central Bohemia, who, in a conference call to his colleagues, expressed dissatisfaction with his superiors' decision to purchase expensive Ford Mondeos for the police force. His superiors decided that the expression of such critical views should be a criminal offence and launched an investigation into the matter. A recording of the conference call has been submitted as evidence. It would appear that police powers to monitor private telephone calls are, indeed, too extensive. Parliament will have to look into the legal procedures that grant police the right to tap individual telephones. And once the tapping is complete, the person whose telephone calls have been monitored should be officially informed. This would, hopefully, ensure tapping conversations isn't taken lightly.

Missing the point

The corruption scandal surrounding Freedom Party (US-DEU) member of parliament Zdeněk Kořistka is another example of the wobbliness of Czech political and administrative structures. This is another issue on which the Czech media seem to have created almost total confusion. Surely the most important consideration is this: Kořistka told Mladá Fronta Dnes reporters that he had been offered a bribe by those connected to the Civic Democratic Party (ODS) only after ODS leader Mirek Topolánek informed journalists that ODS representatives had spoken to Kořistka. It seems logical to conclude that after Topolánek told the journalists about ODS contact with Kořistka, Kořistka assumed the ODS had played a trick on him and may have even been out to destroy him. So he took fright and told MFD reporters his side of the story --- assuming, naturally, that they would investigate the matter before they wrote. They published the story straight away, against Kořistka's wishes and without any evidence.

In the confusion that has followed, the basic facts of the case seem to have been lost. The lie-detector games are a red herring.

But one of the most worrying things about the scandal remains that some Czechs, including several politicians, do not see anything wrong in giving money to MPs in return for political favors.

Originally published in Czech Business Weekly HERE