|
|
Editorial Review
From the opinion pages of the Czech press
Editorial Review | Search restaurants | Archives
August 17th, 2005 issue
CzechTek focused the public's attention on the police at a time when the appointment of a new police president is anticipated, observes Petruska Sustrová in Lidové noviny Aug. 12. Unfortunately, the way the police are perceived as an essentially repressive force is outdated, inherited from the past regime when everyone knew their duty was also to persecute naughty citizens and quell all public dissent. It is obvious that the police cannot have any such role in a democratic society. The problem is that many people regard police officers as they like to regard themselves: as masked, trigger-happy tough guys. This is a tragically flawed view we don't live in an action movie. The police have undergone many changes since 1990 but one thing that hasn't changed is that it is the Interior Ministry that investigates transgressions of police officers. In the past, this body was basically intended to protect police officers from prosecution. Not much seems to have changed. There are very few cases of police officers being tried in court for abuse of power. Superiors are often willing to gloss over the misdeeds of their subordinates and believe the sympathetic testimony of fellow officers. That means that the police have become a state within the state a fearsome community that can afford to commit almost any act in the name of maintaining order. It would be beneficial if the new police president changed this attitude. However, such a person would have to be someone with a profoundly democratic outlook in order for that to happen. It shouldn't be someone accustomed to the status quo, such as police Vice President Vladislav Husák, currently the most likely candidate for the top job, concludes Sustrová.
Czech entrepreneur Frantisek Príplata, who recently escaped from criminal prosecution in Romania, claims he was the victim of an unjust and fabricated trial, notes Daniel Any´z in Mladá fronta Dnes Aug. 13. Príplata accuses the Romanian courts of being biased toward local Mafia interests and a Czech member of the European Parliament plans to bring the case up in that body, arguing that the case proves the lack of independence and impartiality of Romanian courts in general. The Czech media's coverage of the story also reflects a disparaging view of all things Romanian. It is true that Romania's judicial system is in need of reform, which is a condition of that country's entry into the European Union in 2007. However, one may look at the issue from a different angle. Imagine if a Czech court sent a German or a Briton to jail. What his compatriots would no doubt see upon a closer look would be a bizarre tug of war between the justice minister and the highest state attorney a Constitutional Court justice that once sent a pub owner to jail for not wanting to host a Communist Party meeting in his beerhall and a number of state attorneys who had persecuted dissidents before 1989. Add the rulings in property restitution cases that run contrary to both common sense and decency and Germany or Britain would be aghast that their national is at the mercy of such a backward legal culture. Their media would ask whether Czechs reared in poverty and dictatorship have any clue about the independence of the judiciary. Czechs would take offense and much would be written about how unfair and biased the West is against them. Frantisek Príplata says he has heaps of documents proving his innocence. He should be allowed to make his case. But national prejudices should be left out, concludes Any´z.
Compiled by Dan Macek
Other articles in Opinion (17/08/2005):
Browse the Current Issue
|
Most visited in Business Listings
|
Be the first to add a comment!