Filip Rybanič, a bank employee and the assistant to opposition MP Jozef Rajtár, has scanned the bank accounts of Interior Minister Robert Kaliňák. Rybanič provided information from these accounts to media. According to the prosecutor, he committed the crime of disclosing bank secrets. The defender claims that this was done in public interest as his client pointed at the transaction between the Interior Minister and controversial entrepreneur Ladislav Bašternák.
The trial started in summer. The attorney wants to qualify Rybanič as a whistleblower. This should be decided upon by the EU Court of Justice. "From our perspective, it is crucial that the District court asked the EU Court of Justice for an interpretive statement to some of our questions," said attorney Marek Para. The definition of a whistleblower shows that it is a person who have announced an illegal activity and should not be punished for that. The Bratislava District court is, however, not obliged to do that.
"It is the right of that particular judge," says Viliam Karas, advocate and an expert in European judiciary adding that there is no post-conviction remedy in this case. The attorney Marek Para has already announced that if the District court does not ask for the interpretive statement, he will submit a complaint at the European court of human rights. He mentions the case Guja vs Moldova in which a General Prosecutor's office employee broke the inviolability of letters. In this case, the European court of justice decided that such people should be protected.
The Slovak Police corps President Tibor Gašpar does not view Filip Rybanič a whistleblower. According to him, it is not possible to point at a criminal activity by committing another crime. Advocate Viliam Karas warns that if European court of justice would find Rybanič a whistleblower, a dangerous precedence would be created. "If we preferred protecting the announcer, we would break the notion bank secrecy and undermine functioning of banks in the civilized world," said Karas.
Filip Rybanič faces 3 up to 8 years in prison for disclosing the bank secrecy. The District court adjourned the case until 1st March 2018.
