This is what happened to Prague-based lawyer Petr Partyk. He dared to express dissatisfaction with a decision by Jiří Chour, the head of the local building authority in Prague 7, to overrule the objections of the National Conservation Office and allow the addition of two more stories to the block of flats in which Partyk lives.

Partyk posted a critical piece on the decision on the Internet discussion forum of the Municipal Authority for Prague 7 and other people posted a number of additional contributions, which were aggressive and slanderous, under Partyk's name. Chour brought criminal proceedings against Partyk for slander. The police took the case seriously, raided Partyk's office and seized his computer. Partyk lost his job.

The Czech criminal code retains a number of communist-era articles that punish "verbal crimes." International human rights organizations have repeatedly called for the country to abolish its defamation and insult laws, which the groups say limit the freedom of expression that is vital to a democracy.

A February 2000 statement from the UN, OSCE and the Organization of American States on civil defamation laws stated, "politicians and public officials should have to tolerate a greater degree of criticism." The European Union also subscribes to this view.

But in the Czech Republic, different rules prevail. Judge Richard Šídlo, who found Partyk guilty of criminal defamation, feels that the state must protect officials from criticism: "Since the article punishing the verbal abuse of officials by citizens was dropped from the Czech criminal code, public officials are exposed to limitless insults by inveterate complainers like Petr Partyk," the judge told the weekly newspaper Respekt.

But the problem is also that Partyk was found guilty even though it was never proved that he made the offending remarks. The report submitted to the court states clearly that Partyk's guilt cannot be proven. The verdict, however, contains this justification: "The forensic report states that it cannot be ascertained whether the accused person's computer was used to access the Web site in question. But witnesses state that the accused person had been using this computer." The logic of this is dubious, to put it mildly.

On being found guilty, Partyk was sentenced to 200 hours community service, which was reduced to 150 hours on appeal. He was told that the charges against him would be dropped if he accepted his guilt and showed remorse. He refused to do this, pointing out that the court had not been able to prove his guilt. He also refused to do the community work. And so now, Judge Šídlo has sent him to prison for 75 days.

The Czech courts seem to disregard the fact that they are sentencing people in accordance with criminal articles that are regarded as questionable in most Western European countries. They also do not seem to care that they have sentenced someone they could not prove was guilty. The appeals court verdict says it all: "Although the court has found evidence from which it follows that a criminal offense has not been committed, the accused person has been quite justifiably found guilty of this criminal offense." Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Originally published in Czech Business Weekly HERE