Slovak News Back to the news
Hanzel Withdraws Criminal Complaint Concerning Threatening E-mail
Thursday 27 May 2010 Zoom in | Print page
Bratislava, May 27 (TASR) - Businessman and former Smer-SD MP Bohumil Hanzel, who has alleged that Smer traded official state posts in return for sponsor money, has withdrawn a criminal complaint that he submitted on Tuesday concerning a threat sent to him by an e-mail.
Hanzel withdrew the complaint after former Slovak parliamentary vice-chair Jan Majer confessed that he had sent the e-mail and apologised to Hanzel.
"I think he's a simple man, who acted like that under the influence of information presented by the media. If it was really him ... as it can never be ruled out that it wasn't really him," Hanzel told TASR, adding that he took the matter seriously, but wasn't scared.
According to SME daily, Majer said that he wrote the e-mail to Hanzel due to a "serious illness and under the influence of various scribbles by journalists". According to Majer, this was only a warning. "I definitely didn't want to threaten him," he claimed.
The e-mail warned Hanzel that he'd better "shut up", or he could well "be for it". Majer also wrote that Hanzel's business success was only based on his party membership [he was number 8 on Smer's slate in the 2002 election - ed. note], a statement that Hanzel called nonsense, adding that he was in business for 20 years, while Smer has only a ten-year history.
Hanzel, who parted ways with the party in 2006, has said that he saw a notary-authenticated copy of an agreement between Smer and five sponsors concerning specified places on the Smer election slate. He also said that he in person attended many meetings with sponsors who provided some Sk60 million (€1.99 million) to the party in 2000-02. Smer chairman (and now Prime Minister) Robert Fico is also said to have solicited sponsors for the party.
All rights reserved. Any publishing or further dissemination of press releases and photographs from TASR's resources without TASR's prior written approval constitutes a violation of the Copyrights Act.
