AT agency LETA informs that the court recognized that, when trying the case, the appeal court did not commit any violations of the Criminal Law or the Criminal Procedure Law, which could be the basis for canceling the decision of the appeal court.
At the same time, the Supreme Administrative Court annulled the part of the decision of the Riga Regional Court on the application of the coercive measure – 15,000 euros – to the trucking company.
The policeman, patrolling the road, stopped the truck. Having ascertained that the toll for the use of roads had not been paid for it, he did not go to draw up the protocol of the administrative violation, but indirectly but clearly demanded a bribe.
The driver of the vehicle, after a telephone conversation with his boss – the director of the company’s freight forwarding department – informed the police officer that the toll will be paid and the bribe request has been accepted. In the meantime, the boss contacted the employee – the custodian and, explaining the situation, asked him to take the money away. The policeman met with the bailiff at the agreed place, where he received 100 euros.
The driver of the vehicle and his boss were sentenced to two years and six months of imprisonment, with a three-year probationary period, for bribery committed in a group of persons after a prior agreement. Both have been deprived of the right to engage in commercial activities related to cargo transportation for two years.
The custodian was sentenced to two years of imprisonment for mediating bribery, with a probationary period of two years and six months.
According to AT, the appellate court, concluding that the accused employees of the trucking company committed the criminal offenses in the interest of the employer, did not evaluate several circumstances that are important for the fair adjudication of the case.
AT pointed out that there is no basis for the application of the means of coercive influence to the legal entity, if the connection of the legal entity with a criminal offense or with the natural person who committed the criminal offense has not been proven. In the canceled part, the case was sent for a new consideration to the Riga Regional Court, so that, after evaluating all the circumstances relevant to the decision of the issue, it would make a decision corresponding to them.
Source: www.diena.lv
