Peter Kažimír, Governor of the National Bank of Slovakia and former finance minister under the now-ruling Smer party, has been convicted for a second time in a bribery case involving a €48,000 payment to influence tax proceedings linked to politically connected firms—yet continues to hold office after refusing repeated calls to resign. The non-final verdict, issued by the Specialised Criminal Court following a full trial, imposes a €200,000 fine but no prison term due to recent legislative changes limiting custodial sentencing. Kažimír, who played a key role in founding Hlas, a coalition partner formed by former Smer officials, maintains the charges are politically motivated and claims prosecutors sought his cooperation to implicate senior figures, including Prime Minister Robert Fico. The case, driven by testimony from a convicted ex-tax chief turned state witness, has reignited concerns about judicial independence, selective prosecution, and the rollback of anti-corruption safeguards in Slovakia, where earlier investigations into top officials—including the prime minister—were blocked by the Prosecutor General using a controversial legal provision.
Peter Kažimír, Governor of the National Bank of Slovakia and former finance minister under the Smer party, has been convicted for a second time in a bribery case tied to tax audits of firms linked to his associates. The Specialised Criminal Court found that in 2017, while still in office, he paid €48,000 to František Imrecze, then head of the Slovak Financial Administration. Judge Milan Cisarik issued a €200,000 fine, citing the size of the bribe and Kažimír’s income. A 2023 legal amendment prevented custodial sentencing unless no other penalty was possible, despite the prosecution’s call for prison.
Though the verdict remains non-final, Kažimír has refused to resign and continues in his post, with no successor named by the coalition government despite the expiry of his six-year term. He did not attend sentencing, citing official travel, and is expected to appeal. The case marks the second conviction related to the same events—his earlier 2022 penal order was contested, leading to a full trial.
Corruption Sentence, No Exit: Governor Stays Despite Guilty Verdict
Controversy surrounded the legal basis of the trial. To avoid dismissal under shortened limitation periods, Judge Cisarik reclassified the offence as one harming the EU’s financial interests, noting the bribe related to VAT proceedings that affect EU revenue. The defence objected, arguing the statute originally applied to foreign officials and that no financial harm to the EU had been shown. The court rejected this, stating the law cannot be selectively interpreted.
Proceedings took place largely behind closed doors due to financial confidentiality. Imrecze, now a cooperating witness and himself convicted in separate corruption cases, claimed Kažimír said the funds were “for the Lojects”—the audited firms. Kažimír, maintaining innocence, publicly denounced the trial as politically motivated, claiming prosecutors offered leniency in exchange for implicating senior politicians.
The defence portrayed Imrecze as unreliable, seeking leniency by targeting higher-ranking officials. He had previously implicated Prime Minister Robert Fico and Defence Minister Robert Kaliňák in cases later dismissed by the Prosecutor General using Paragraph 363, a legal tool Kažimír also once used to avoid prosecution before being re-indicted.
Additional scrutiny followed defence lawyer Ondrej Mularčík’s unsuccessful attempt to disqualify Judge Cisarik for alleged bias, citing his role in a divorce case involving the judge’s spouse. This claim arose just as the court prepared to rule and was dismissed as unfounded.
Prosecutors revealed Kažimír withdrew €60,000 in cash around the time of the alleged bribe—far exceeding his normal activity—and received €1 million from a firm he had loaned money to, which he failed to declare in official disclosures. The defence denied any wrongdoing and offered no alternate explanation for the cash withdrawal, calling the financial revelations irrelevant.
Judiciary Faces Political Pressure and Public Distrust
Kažimír’s continued position has renewed debate over Slovakia’s rule-of-law credibility. He claims the case aimed to force him out and discredit political allies. The Hlas party, a Smer offshoot now in government, reportedly supports his retention and credits him with helping found the party—an affiliation Prime Minister Fico has publicly acknowledged.
The case has become a focal point for concerns about judicial independence, elite impunity, and the weakening of anti-corruption mechanisms in Slovakia. Its outcome may shape public trust in institutions meant to safeguard democratic accountability.
Source: Veronika Prušová | Denník N
