Petőcz Kálmán (szerk.): National Populism and Slovak - Hungarian Relations in Slovakia 2006-2009 (Somorja, 2009)
Annex
Annex - Marie Vrabcová told the media; however, his testimony has not affected the false evidence lawsuit against Malinová in any way whatsoever. Prosecutíoin offERS A deaI On July 2, 2007, Attorney General Dobroslav Tmka turned down Malinová’s complaint objecting to prejudice of the Office of District Attorney in Nitra as unjustified and decided that investigation of the case would remain with the Nitra police. On July 20, 2007, the Fair Play Alliance civic association launched a petition drive demanding proper investigation of the attack on Hedviga Malinová. Three days later, Police Force President Ján Packa admitted in a media interview that Malinová might have been battered by someone but added that “the incident did not happen the way she describes it”.17 Also, Packa resolutely refused that the police had made a mistake by abandoning investigation of the case. Speaking for the media on July 31, 2007, Spokesman of the Office of Regional Attorney in Nitra Jaroslav Maček hinted that the prosecutor would abandon criminal action against Hedviga Malinová in the case of false evidence if the victim admitted that she had lied.18 He proposed either conditional abandonment of criminal prosecution or an extrajudicial settlement with the prosecutor. Malinová’s legal counsel Roman Kvasnica refused both of these ‘options’, saying that the only acceptable proposal was abandonment of criminal prosecution of his client and proper investigation of the attack. On August 1, 2007, the public learned that the Office of Attorney General had appointed Róbert Vlachovský as the people’s representative in the case of false evidence against Malinová; in 1996, Vlachovský in the post of Bratislava regional attorney ordered a release of two SIS agents who were suspected of participating in the infamous abduction of Michal Kováč, Jr., and took the case away from investigator Peter Vačok. Vlachovský had already made two decisions in the case of Malinová: first, he decided that the case investigator had been right not to hand over the videotapes of the September 9 interrogation of Malinová to her legal counsel; second, he signed the decision by which the Office of Attorney General turned down the complaint objecting to Nitra prosecutors’ prejudice. On August 8, 2007, the Office of District Attorney in Nitra turned down the complaint against launching criminal prosecution of Malinová on grounds of false evidence filed on May 21, 2007, as unjustified. District Attorney Igor Seneši explained legislative standards that formed the basis 308
