The interrogation of former legal director of Yara, Kendrick Wallace, was stopped just after lunch in Oslo District Court Tuesday when Judge Heidi Heggedal began asking questions about the formalities in connection with the interrogation of Wallace conducted in Paris.
– Was he submitted that he had the right not to testify on matters that may incriminate himself, the judge asked.
Wallace, together with four former Yara tops accused of gross corruption by having paid bribes to the son of Libya’s former oil minister. The agreement with minister’s son was entered into in connection with Yara was negotiating a fertilizer cooperation with Libya’s national oil company NOC, where his father was chairman. Three of the four are also charged with a similar relationship in India. (See fact box)
Wallace was arrested when he landed in Paris on 12 May 2012. French police raided the apartment he owned in Paris with Wallace present, before he was taken for questioning. Wallace did not avail themselves of the right to have a lawyer in the interrogation.
Unclear what rights preached
In the minutes of the French interrogation, which was conducted by French police at the request of Økokrim, it says that “initial prosessualia made” but it says nothing about their content.
After a longer break in court, where the prosecutor Marianne Djupesland from Økokrim conferred with a French interrogation judge was involved in the interrogations of Wallace and follows the case from side bench, it was decided that the court should be interrupted until Økokrim answered the question.
– Several representatives from the Economic Crime Division were present as observers during interrogations, which were undertaken by French law says Djupesland who standing up could answer what rights which was submitted Wallace during the introduction to the interview.
Economic Crime said earlier in the day that they did not tilltatelse to record the interrogation, as is customary under Norwegian law.
Indicted or witness?
The defendants in the case also raised questions about the formal status of Wallce and co-defendants Daniel Clauw when they were arrested and interrogated in Paris 12th May 2012.
– The problem is that we have a seizure, which can not be done if you have a witness. Meanwhile presented Wallace with a charge that applies Yara, and not him. I see the documents that I should have been more aware of this earlier, when it only says that initial prosessualia made.
– I may have been a bit too naive and thought that this was the prosessualia you will wear for the Norwegian Penal Code, said attorney Arild Dyngeland, which defends Kendrick Wallace.
Lawyer Fredrik Berg, who defends Daniel Clauw, says the same issues apply to interrogation was conducted by his client the same day.
He said the consequence could be that Økokrim not get the opportunity to use the first interrogation by Wallace in court, if it turns out that Wallace was not submitted their rights in a correct way.
Changed explanation
Wallace shall interrogation have said that it was now co-defendants Tor Holba who asked him to contact oil minister’s son in Libya.
In his explanation Monday however went Wallace back on this and said that he remembered wrong, that it was “completely wrong”. The gap between Monday explanation and explanations Wallace gave interrogation in Paris and in two subsequent questioning in Brussels in June and November should be central to Økokrim questioning Tuesday.
– The explanation you gave yesterday is different so many points that it really is a completely new explanation, said prosecutor Marianne Djupesland from law enforcement authorities in their interrogation earlier that day.
Attorney Nadia Hall, representing Tor Holba, has previously stressed that she mean all the charges of Holba based on information Wallace gave during interrogation. She believes, however, data can not be emphasized when he testified about the conditions far back in time, without documentation to support with.
– For us it is irrelevant whether Økokrim interrogation from Paris, says Holbe others defend Astri Aas-Hansen. She said the case will show that Holba matter had no knowledge of the disputed agreement.
Attorney Ellen Holager Andenæs, which defends former CEO of Yara, Thorleif Enger, do not think the decision of the question are of great importance for the case to her client.
– But that does not Økokrim fail to respond to the status defendant during initial questioning is quite special, says Andenæs.
Yara case continues in Oslo District Court Wednesday morning.
Read also: – We would avoid a media circus
Published:
No comments:
Post a Comment