The verdict issued by the Supreme Court (VS) in December regarding the builders' cartel was like a Christmas gift for several construction companies. The Senate ruled that secret recordings of conversations between the owners of construction firms made by the Bureau for Prevention and Combating Corruption (BPBCK) could not be used in the investigation of competition violations.
Now the case will have to be reconsidered, but without the use of audio recordings as evidence. As reported by the LTV program "De facto", the Senate's verdict will affect not only the further consideration of this specific case but may also significantly complicate the investigation of similar violations in the future.
"The most important thing is that this evidence was obtained by significantly infringing on the private lives of individuals," explained Supreme Court Justice Rudite Vidusa, one of the judges who reviewed the case.
The court concluded that the law on operational activities very strictly defines the purposes of conducting secret operations. Administrative cases, which include competition violations, are not among them. As a result, the Senate overturned the decision of the lower court and sent the case for reconsideration, excluding the audio recordings from the body of evidence.
The Competition Council does not hide the fact that it was the intercepted conversations that allowed the cartel to be uncovered. However, the head of the council, Ieva Shmite, refused to speculate on the further outcome of the case.
"This cartel was implemented verbally, without informing the employees of the companies about the existence of such an agreement. Only the participants in the negotiations were aware of it. Therefore, it is now impossible to say whether the same result will be achieved without this evidence," she noted. Representatives of the construction companies are satisfied with the Senate's decision. The lawyers of most of them indicated in their cassation appeals that the information obtained by the Bureau for Prevention and Combating Corruption (BPBCK) during the surveillance was transferred to the Competition Council unlawfully.
"What is the court's message in this situation? Should the BPBCK, knowing that such fraudulent actions are taking place, have ignored it and allowed the violations to continue?" Shmite rhetorically asked.
According to her, this verdict will now have to be taken into account when investigating any similar cases. The case against the builders' cartel was not the only one in which the BPBCK cooperated with the Competition Council.
"If we strictly adhere to this verdict, then in the future, there may not be any open cartel cases, as the Competition Council is not an operational activity subject. Without operational measures or the capabilities that law enforcement agencies have, it will be extremely difficult to detect such violations," stated Ineta Cirule, Deputy Head of the BPBCK for Investigations.
