[ad_1]
As a report, the Attorney General evaluated the issue by investigating what happened in court.
Polt Péter whether the question whether an investigation or criminal investigation had already been conducted Lőrinc Mészáros Due to her divorce, life practically came to a halt at the Buda Central District Court. Gergely Arató According to him, this may have been a crime, since the billionaire billionaire
non-public official, unprotected,
only a private individual, so it would not have been possible to close a public institution, restrict the free movement of those who work there, those who intend to enter and enter, obstruct the administration of official affairs.
According to Gergely Arató, this could have violated the principle of freedom of movement guaranteed in the Basic Law, the Penal Code states. Suspicion of violation of personal liberty regulated in article 194.
If this has been ordered by official persons without a specific legal reason, the basis is provided by the Penal Code. 305 to establish a well-founded suspicion of mismanagement, the politician wrote.
It would be important to know who, for what reasons, why and with reference to the law, restricted the functioning of the independent judiciary.Apparently because of this, many of the civil litigation and criminal cases scheduled for that day were lost. Even if clients have left to no avail, your case may take months setting another deadline for negotiations, the costs of this will have to be borne by them. The substantive decisions that could be taken at that time were forced to be postponed for an illicit, illegal, arbitrary decision, he added.
According to Gergely Arató, in the divorce case of Lőrinc Mészáros the right was abused, that is, the prosecution as an independent prosecutor.
obligation to act against any infringement. The politician notes that Péter Polt always gave the same schematic, template-like response to his earlier written questions:
The prosecution always acts in a lawful, professional and reasonable manner in all cases.
So ask
- if Péter Polt did something in the specific case?
- If not, why not?
- Has an investigation or investigation been initiated to establish criminal responsibility?
- Why was this amazing and unprecedented step taken and what was the specific motive of public policy or public safety?
The Attorney General evaluated the opposition politician’s request as a complaint and forwarded it to the Budapest Police Headquarters. Péter Polt justified his decision with the usual explanation.
It is up to the investigating authority, which has the power and competence, to assess whether the reported conduct gives rise to a suspicion of crime and, therefore, to order an investigation.
Featured image: 24.hu / Márton Mohos
[ad_2]
