Respekt: PM is either coward, or President Klaus's victim

Prague, Jan 7 (CTK) - Czech Prime Minister Petr Necas (Civic Democrats, ODS) is either a coward, or he has paid dearly for his clash with outgoing President Vaclav Klaus, an unpredictable, hostile-minded and divisive politician, Marek Svehla writes in weekly Respekt out Monday.

He is commenting on the wide amnesty Klaus announced in his New Year's speech on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the Czech Republic that also halts criminal prosecution continuing for more than eight years.

Svehla writes that the Supreme State Attorney's Office estimates this will concern about 100 cases of tunnelling, corruption and big frauds.

As a result an estimated 40,000 to 100,000 people may lose a chance of being returned at least a part of the money that they lost through the frauds, Svehla writes.

He writes that the signature that Necas added to the amnesty as required by law, but which the prime minister can reject, may have several explanations.

Klaus may have bartered Necas's signature under the amnesty for his own signature under the government-sponsored reform package of tax changes in December while he criticised and even blocked the reform bills before, Svehla writes.

He writes that some of the amnestied fraud and corruption cases originated in the lax regulation of banks and the capital market under Klaus's government in the 1990s.

Their investigation was marred by the directed paralysis of the police corps during the opposition agreement that Klaus signed with then Social Democrat chairman Milos Zeman, Svehla writes.

Under the opposition agreement Klaus's ODS tolerated Zeman's minority government in exchange for a portion of power in 1998-2002.

Now, that the judiciary has recovered and is trying to make up for the time lost, Klaus is completely frustrating it with his amnesty, Svehla writes.

He writes that lawyer Hana Marvanova is right when she says the amnesty destroys trust in justice, in that elected politicians are defending public interest, whereby it threatens democracy as such.

Did Klaus want to help people who were "building capitalism" under his rule, or did he want to move the Czech Republic further to the east, out from Europe, which has been his long-time goal, Svehla asks.

He writes that Klaus may have also wanted to humiliate the judiciary that slipped out of his control in the 1990s and subordinate it to large political parties.

This may be indicated by the appointment on January 2 of Jaroslav Bures, a judge having the reputation of an agile participant in backstage political deals, to the head of the very important High Court in Prague where a majority of big appealed cases ends up, Svehla writes.

He says Klaus accompanied the appointment that went almost unnoticed in the outcry over the amnesty with the words: "I believe that everything will now already be in order at your high court, that you will be judging so well that there will be no longer need for any amnesties and pardons."

In other words, this may have meant that Bures will see to it that it be no longer necessary to save the right people with unnecessarily conspicuous operations, Svehla writes..

Whatever Klaus's motives may have been, it is a question why Necas took part in it, Svehla writes.

He says the prime minister bears responsibility for his signature like any one else, and if he has any doubts about the amnesty running against the needs of the country, he must have the opportunity to refuse the signature.

Necas has been criticised for many of the decisions he made, such as badly prepared reforms, retreat into international isolation, non-transparent governing, but all these were issues that could be discussed, Svehla writes.

However, to be cowardly looking on the completely derailed president depriving thousands of fraud victims of their chance of justice and compensation, is a failure that cannot be justified, Svehla writes.

Necas is also criticised by both the opposition as well as the other government coalition parties, TOP 09 and LIDEM, Svehla writes.

He writes that Klaus's manoeuvring may also be behind Necas's unconcealed disgust with which he rejected his invitation to the traditional New Year's luncheon at the presidential chateau in Lany, central Bohemia.

Svehla writes that whatever the explanation of the causes of Klaus and Necas's behaviour may be, it will now be most important to take a lesson from Klaus's amnesty and to be cautious about the "order" which Bures has been assigned to introduce at the Prague High Court.