The Supreme Court of Latvia has decided to overturn the acquittal issued by the Riga Regional Court in the so-called second digital television criminal case, in which several individuals were charged, including former Minister of Transport and current Riga City Council member Ainārs Šlesers and former Prime Minister Andris Šķēle.
The Supreme Court has ordered that the case be sent back to the Riga Regional Court for a new hearing, Supreme Court Justice Irīna Jansone announced on Friday.
The Supreme Court found that the appellate court failed to evaluate the evidence in the case in accordance with the requirements of the Criminal Procedure Law, which constitutes sufficient grounds to annul the judgment in its entirety.
According to the Supreme Court, the appellate court concluded that payments made to an intermediary had not caused losses to Tet Ltd., the winner of the digital television broadcasting tender. However, the court failed to properly apply established legal doctrine and therefore incorrectly concluded that earning a profit from the project excluded the possibility of causing losses. The Supreme Court further noted that part of the evidence had been assessed incompletely and inconsistently with its actual content.
The Supreme Court also found that, when assessing the circumstances surrounding the implementation of digital television broadcasting and the development of its regulatory framework,
the appellate court failed to evaluate witness testimony and opinions provided by state institutions.
As a result, the evidence did not effectively refute the prosecution’s position that the text of the Cabinet of Ministers regulations had been deliberately amended during the drafting process, after submission to the State Secretaries’ Meeting, in order to create grounds for involving an intermediary in the broadcasting project.
In addition, the Supreme Court concluded that the appellate court had incompletely assessed findings contained in a State Audit Office report regarding the preparation and conduct of the tender.
Because the appellate court failed to evaluate the evidence in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Law and concluded that no fraud had occurred—which the prosecution considered the predicate offence—
the acquittal must also be annulled in the part concerning the legalization of criminally obtained assets
and the non-application of coercive measures against a legal entity.
The Supreme Court also provided clarification regarding the legal interpretation of aggravated fraud under Section 177(3) of the Criminal Law, guidance that the appellate court must take into account during the retrial.
This provision stipulates that fraud committed on a large scale, by an organized group, or involving the acquisition of narcotic, psychotropic, toxic, radioactive, explosive substances, firearms or ammunition may be punishable by imprisonment ranging from two to ten years, with or without confiscation of property and with or without probation supervision.
The court further emphasized that a victim’s financial interests may be harmed indirectly, including by misleading another person or a group of persons responsible for making official decisions regarding the legality of a transaction.
The Supreme Court initiated cassation proceedings in this case in May 2024
following an appeal by the prosecution against the acquittal issued by the Riga Regional Court.
According to the prosecution, the appellate court failed to comply with legal requirements and established case law governing the assessment of evidence. Several pieces of evidence presented by the prosecution were unjustifiably declared irrelevant to the case.
The prosecution argues that the court relied excessively and uncritically on the testimony of the defendants themselves when assessing key facts. It also claims that some evidence was not evaluated at all, while other evidence was assessed superficially, fragmentarily, or inconsistently with its content. The prosecution maintains that the court failed to assess the evidence as a whole and in its mutual context.
According to prosecutors,
these shortcomings were so significant that the appellate court reached unfounded and incorrect conclusions
regarding all essential issues related to the charges.
The prosecution argues that the defendants intentionally acted to unlawfully involve Hannu Digital Ltd. in the digital terrestrial television project and in contractual relations with Tet and the Latvian State Radio and Television Centre (LVRTC), thereby obtaining Tet’s financial resources through deception and abuse of trust.
The court, according to the prosecution, incorrectly applied the provisions of the Criminal Law governing fraud and therefore wrongly concluded that no criminal offence had occurred.
The prosecution further argues that the court failed to properly apply legal provisions governing the establishment of facts differing from those stated in the indictment and also incorrectly applied Section 318 of the Criminal Law, which concerns abuse of official position causing substantial harm or serious consequences.
The prosecution therefore requested that the acquittal be overturned
and that the case be returned for a new hearing before the Riga Regional Court.
Those charged in the case include Ainārs Šlesers, Andris Šķēle, former Tet (formerly Lattelecom) CEO Juris Gulbis, former Ministry of Transport State Secretary Nils Freivalds, former LVRTC Chairman Lauris Dripe, former Hannu Digital board member Gintars Kavacis, former Tet Commercial Director Jānis Ligers, Business Division Head Toms Ābele, and Business Support Division Head Toms Meisītis.
The charges concern actions related to a 2008 Ministry of Transport tender for the provision of digital television broadcasting services and subsequent agreements concluded between Tet, Hannu Digital and LVRTC.
According to the prosecution, the defendants acted to unlawfully involve Hannu Digital in the project, resulting in the company receiving several million euros from Tet and significantly increasing the overall cost of the nationwide project.
The allegedly criminally obtained funds amount to approximately 3 million euros.
The alleged offences took place in 2008 and 2009, when the Ministry of Transport organized the digital television tender and subsequently concluded agreements involving Hannu Digital.
Previously, the Economic Affairs Court also acquitted all defendants in the case.
During closing arguments, prosecutors requested that Andris Šķēle be found guilty of fraud and money laundering and sentenced to three years’ imprisonment, a 75,000 euros fine and confiscation of property. Prosecutors also sought recovery of 1,266,355 euros, which they alleged represented criminally obtained proceeds.
For Ainārs Šlesers, prosecutors sought a conviction for fraud and a 65,000 euros fine.
The prosecution requested fines of 75,000 euros each for Juris Gulbis, Lauris Dripe and Gintars Kavacis; 60,000 euros each for Nils Freivalds and Jānis Ligers; 50,000 euros for Toms Ābele; and 45,000 euros for Toms Meisītis.
The Supreme Court’s decision means that one of Latvia’s longest-running and most politically sensitive corruption cases will once again return to court for a new review of the evidence.
It is also worth noting that the so-called first digital television criminal case remains ongoing. The Riga Regional Court is scheduled to continue hearings on the 5th of October. That case concerns the earlier phase of the digital television project implemented in 2002–2003 and has already been heard twice, with previous judgments also overturned by the Supreme Court.
Read also: Prosecutor’s Office announces findings on former Latvian Prime Minister’s use of airport VIP lounge