In an interview with Czech Position, former head of the Government Office Jan Novák says that during the Czechs’ turn at the helm of the rotating EU Presidency, the budget for staging events fell under then-minister for EU foreign affairs Alexandr Vondra, and that Novák was only responsible for checking legal conformity of contracts drawn up by Vondra’s team.
Following the resignation of Pavel Drobil (Civic Democrats, ODS) as environment minister, the ProMoPro affair is the next scandal to undermine the anti-corruption campaign declared by Petr Nečas’ (ODS) government; now the defense minister, Vondra (TOP 09) still has not managed to deliver a convincing explanation for the seemingly astronomical sum paid to ProMoPro.
It emerged last Wednesday that the Ministry of Finance had lodged a criminal complaint against the company ProMoPro — which won a government order to provide audiovisual services for conferences and meetings hosted by the Czech EU Presidency in 2009 — and unnamed members of the Government Office. The next day, Vondra (currently the defense minister) denied any wrongdoing on his part.
Nečas was quick to come to the defense of Vondra, saying that responsibility for spending by the Government Office falls under the head of the office, who at the time was Jan Novák. Nevertheless, in an interview with Czech Position, Novák says that he was only responsible for checking that technical parameters were correct in contracts drawn up by Vondra’s section responsible for the organization of the Czech EU Presidency.
Vondra’s team, says Novák, was essentially responsible for the EU presidency budget spending and claims that he only signed off the first Kč 40 million paid to ProMoPro. In total the company received over Kč 800 million from state coffers for the provision of audiovisual and interpreting services.
Q: If it turns out that the contracts between the Government Office and the company ProMoPro were legally flawed, who will carry the responsibility?
A: Allow me to say something in the way of introduction. This is something that nobody has said up until now. I always highly appreciated the work of the people in the section for the preparation of the Czech EU presidency, which fell under then-deputy prime minister [Alexandr Vondra], but which organizationally and from a working-legal perspective was part of the Government Office.
Q: And how was it with responsibility for the contract in question?
A: Responsibility for the preparation and fulfillment of the contract can easily be inspected according to the organizational order of the Government Office and from the Constitution, which specify the responsibilities of constitutional officials and members of the government, and from the laws upon which the central offices of the state administration are founded. The deputy prime minister was not answerable to the head of the Government Office or vice-versa.
Vondra’s section prepared the contract on the basis of the rules for non-public tenders. The section organized the tender independently and then sent it to me to sign with an official explanation. I signed the contract because the deputy prime minister could not sign any contracts due to the fact that his section was not an independent central organ of the state administration. I signed it on the basis of the official explanation that guaranteed that everything was in order.
Q: Who was responsible for the delivery and control of the services provided by the company ProMoPro?
A: Fulfillment of the contract was overseen by the administration of the section headed by Alexandr Vondra.
Q: Did you check the all the documentation submitted to you recommending the signing of the contract with ProMoPro?
A: My subordinates had the single task of checking whether the documentation was complete and its composition conformed to the rules of the Government Office: In other words, to see it the report was properly completed and the contract justified according to the rules.
Q: That’s to say the formalities — but not the content — were checked?
A: Of course. The section under the deputy prime minister was responsible for the content. Again, I stress the section was not under me. The personnel of that section answered to the deputy prime minister.
Q: In an interview published in Lidové noviny last Saturday, Alexandr Vondra said that you apparently told him that he had the advantage of not being responsible for managing finances. Was that so?
A: As head of the Government Office I would never allow myself to speak that way with a constitutional official. Likewise, I can’t imagine a constitutional official accepting such a thing. Full stop.
Q: Contrary to what you told the press previously, Alexandr Vondra doesn’t recall discussing the ProMoPro contract with you. Have you any evidence that that conversation with Vondra took place?
A: I take it you’re not asking me to stand by what I’ve already said on this issue. I’m not in the habit of saying things that I don’t stand by. Until now, I haven’t had reason to search for evidence of the conversation in question and haven’t had reason to find out whether anyone remembers it or not. For me, it’s important that the deputy prime minister informed me that the contract with ProMoPro was in order.
Q: Who was looking after the fulfillment of the contract with ProMoPro when the costs began to run into hundreds of millions of crowns?
A: Together with ProMoPro, we signed a framework agreement, and I signed a preliminary order for the payment of Kč 40 million. You must ask the deputy prime minister’s undersecretary [Jana Hendrichová] or Alexandr Vondra, who processed the invoices within the deputy prime minister’s section. Who placed orders and how they controlled the budget that was allocated for the presidency, really, is a question for them.
Q: Did you sign any invoices for the company ProMoPro?
A: No. I only signed off the initial payment of Kč 40 million on the basis of the signature of the person from the section of the deputy prime minister who guaranteed it was correct. The European section ordered services, checked them and guaranteed their fulfillment. These were then submitted to the economic section of the Government Office, which processed them technically. As such, the budget for the presidency was part of the budget of the Government Office. The European section signed invoices but could not release the funds for them. The funds came from the overall budget of the Government Office.
Q: Is there a department within the Government Office which controls or audits the spending of state money?
A: Yes, there is, and I’m convinced that within the framework of the investigation it will be revealed how the general controlling mechanism of the Government Office worked. Nevertheless, it’s necessary to differentiate between the Government Office budget, which the office managed, and the budget for the presidency, which was managed by Vondra’s section.
Q: Were you not startled by how quickly the costs for the presidency grew?
A: This was discussed many times including on the government level. You must ask the then-deputy prime minister how he explained it to the government.
Q: Then-prime minister Mirek Topolánek [ODS], who otherwise doesn’t communicate with the media, last week came out in defense of Vondra. Did you speak with him about backing you up?
A: Mirek Topolánek commented on the case as a former prime minister and spoke about his former deputy. Also, he was commenting on issues that were settled on the government level. He didn’t comment on Alexandr Vondra and his team’s organizational integration within the Government Office. We didn’t speak together about his announcement. It wouldn’t occur to me to ask him to do such a thing.
