Czech court cancels for second time ruling that acquits former Prime Minister Babiš of fraud charges
PRAGUE (AP) — Prague's High Court canceled for the second time on Monday a lower court ruling that acquitted former Prime Minister Andrej Babiš of fraud charges in a $2 million case involving a European Union subsidy.
The court returned the case for retrial to Prague's Municipal Court to deal with it, saying the lower court, which acquitted Babiš for the second time last year, did not properly assess evidence.
Babiš had pleaded not guilty and repeatedly said the charges against him were politically motivated. The prosecution had originally requested a suspended sentence and a fine to be paid by the populist billionaire who left the courtroom before the verdict was announced.
The municipal court acquitted Babis for the first time in 2023. Prague's High Court later canceled that decision and ordered the case to be retried at the same court.
Babiš' former associate Jana Nagyová, who signed the subsidy request, will also face retrial.
The case centered around a farm known as the Stork's Nest, which received EU subsidies after its ownership was transferred from the Babiš-owned Agrofert conglomerate of around 250 companies to Babis' family members. Later, Agrofert again took ownership of the farm.
The subsidies were meant for medium- and small-sized businesses, which Agrofert wouldn't have been eligible for. The conglomerate later returned the subsidy.
The lower court previously said what Babiš did was not considered criminal.
Babi has become part of the country's opposition after his populist ANO (YES) centrist movement lost the 2021 parliamentary election. He also contended for the largely ceremonial post of president in January 2023 but lost to Petr Pavel, a retired army general.
Monday's verdict comes just months before October's parliamentary election in which Babiš and his movement are predicted to win the vote.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Winnipeg Free Press
36 minutes ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Governors of Western states give mixed reactions to proposed federal land sell-off
SANTA FE, N.M. (AP) — A Republican-sponsored proposal before Congress to mandate the sale of federal public lands received a mixed reception Monday from the governors of Western states. A budget proposal from Utah Republican Sen. Mike Lee would mandate the sale of more than 2 million acres of federal lands to state or other entities. It was included recently in a draft provision of the GOP's sweeping tax cut package. At a summit Monday of Western state governors, New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham said the approach is problematic in New Mexico because of the close relationship residents have with those public lands. 'I'm open' to the idea, said Lujan Grisham, a second-term Democratic governor and former congresswoman. 'Except here.' 'Our public lands, we have a very strong relationship with the openness, and they belong to all of us,' said Lujan Grisham, who was announcing written recommendations Monday on affordable housing strategies from the Western Governors' Association. 'And selling that to the private sector without a process, without putting New Mexicans first, is, for at least for me as a governor, going to be problematic.' Interior Department Secretary Doug Burgum is among the leaders from several federal agencies scheduled to attend the meeting of the association on Monday and Tuesday. Conservation groups vowed to stage public protests over plans to cede public land to development. Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon voiced qualified support for plans to tap federal land for development. 'On a piece-by-piece basis where states have the opportunity to craft policies that make sense … we can actually allow for some responsible growth in areas with communities that are landlocked at this point,' he told a news conference outside the Georgia O'Keeffe Museum in downtown Santa Fe. 'There may be value there.' Lee has said federal land sales under his proposal would target 'isolated parcels' that could be used for housing or infrastructure, and would not include national parks, national monuments or wilderness. Land in 11 Western states from Alaska to New Mexico would be eligible for sale. Montana was carved out of the proposal after its lawmakers objected. In some states, such as Utah and Nevada, the government controls the vast majority of lands, protecting them from potential exploitation but hindering growth.
Winnipeg Free Press
36 minutes ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
As Trump floats regime change in Iran, past US attempts to remake the Middle East may offer warnings
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — As President Donald Trump floats the idea of 'regime change' in Tehran, previous U.S. attempts to remake the Middle East by force over the decades offer stark warnings about the possibility of a deepening involvement in the Iran-Israeli conflict. 'If the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change???' Trump posted on his social media site over the weekend. The came after the U.S. bombed Iran's nuclear sites but before that country retaliated by firing its own missiles at a U.S. base in Qatar. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt on Monday insisted that Trump, who spent years railing against 'forever wars' and pushing an 'America first' world view, had not committed a political about-face. 'The president's posture and our military posture has not changed,' she said, suggesting that a more aggressive approach might be necessary if Iran 'refuses to give up their nuclear program or engage in talks.' Leavitt also suggested that a new government in Iran could come about after its people stage a revolt — not necessarily requiring direct U.S. intervention. 'If they refuse to engage in diplomacy moving forward, why shouldn't the Iranian people rise up,' she asked. That's a perilous path that other U.S. administrations have taken. And it's a long way from Trump's past dismissal of ' stupid, endless wars,' and his scoffing at the idea of nation-building championed by his Republican predecessors — including in Afghanistan and Iraq, where the U.S. helped overthrow governments. Some lessons learned from previous conflicts: Initial success is often fleeting U.S. special forces and Afghan allies drove the Taliban from power and chased Osama bin Laden into Pakistan within months of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. American tanks rolled into Baghdad weeks after the 2003 invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein in Iraq. But then, both wars went on for years. The Taliban waged a tenacious, two-decade insurgency and swept back into power as the U.S. beat a chaotic retreat in 2021. The overthrow of Saddam plunged Iraq into chaos, with Sunni insurgents and Shiite militias battling each other and U.S. forces. Israel has so far largely succeeded in taking out Iran's air defenses and ballistic missiles and the U.S. strikes on three sites with missiles and 30,000-pound (13,600-kilogram) bunker-buster bombs has wrecked its nuclear program, Trump says. But that still potentially leaves hundreds of thousands in the military, the Revolutionary Guard and forces known as the Basij, who played a key role in quashing waves of anti-government protests in recent years. Ground forces are key — but don't guarantee success Airstrikes have never been enough on their own. Take, for example, Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi. His forces withstood a seven-month NATO air campaign in 2011 before rebels fighting city by city eventually cornered and killed him. There are currently no insurgent groups in Iran capable of taking on the Revolutionary Guard, and it's hard to imagine Israeli or U.S. forces launching a ground invasion of a mountainous country of some 80 million people that is about four times as big as Iraq. A split in Iran's own security forces would furnish a ready-made insurgency, but it would also likely tip the country into civil war. There's also the question of how ordinary Iranians would respond. Protests in recent years show that many Iranians believe their government is corrupt and repressive, and would welcome its demise. But the last time a foreign power attacked Iran — the Iraqi invasion of 1980 — people rallied around the flag. At the moment, many appear to be lying low or leaving the capital. Be wary of exiled opposition groups Some of the biggest cheerleaders for the U.S. invasion of Iraq were exiled opposition figures, many of whom had left the country decades before. When they returned, essentially on the back of U.S. tanks, they were marginalized by local armed groups more loyal to Iran. There are several large Iranian opposition groups based abroad. But they are not united and it's unclear how much support any of them has inside the country. The closest thing to a unifying opposition figure is Reza Pahlavi, the son of the shah who was overthrown in the 1979 Islamic Revolution that brought the theocracy to power. But many Iranians have bitter memories of repression under the shah, and others might reject Pahlavi over his outreach to Israel, especially if he tries to ride to power on the back of a foreign invasion. Chaos is practically guaranteed In Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya — and in Syria and Yemen after their 2011 uprisings — a familiar pattern emerged when governments were overthrown or seriously weakened. Armed groups emerged with competing agendas. Neighboring countries backed local proxies. Weapons flowed in and large numbers of civilians fled. The fighting in some places boiled over into full-blown civil war, and ever more violent extremist groups sprouted from the chaos. When it was all over, Saddam had been replaced by a corrupt and often dysfunctional government at least as friendly to Iran as it was to the United States. Gadhafi was replaced by myriad militias, many allied with foreign powers. The Taliban were replaced by the Taliban. ___ Weissert reported from Washington.
Winnipeg Free Press
an hour ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
OpenAI scrubs mention of Jony Ive partnership after judge's ruling over trademark dispute
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A budding partnership between OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and legendary iPhone designer Jony Ive to develop a new artificial intelligence hardware product has hit a legal snag after a federal judge ruled they must temporarily stop marketing the new venture. OpenAI last month announced it was buying io Products, a product and engineering company co-founded by Ive, in a deal valued at nearly $6.5 billion. But it quickly faced a trademark complaint from a startup with a similarly sounding name, IYO, which is also developing AI hardware that it had pitched to Altman's personal investment firm and Ive's design firm in 2022. U.S. District Judge Trina Thompson ruled late Friday that IYO has a strong enough trademark infringement case to proceed to a hearing in October. Until then, she ordered Altman, Ive and OpenAI to refrain from 'using the IYO mark, and any mark confusingly similar thereto, including the IO mark in connection with the marketing or sale of related products.' OpenAI responded by scrubbing its website of mentions of the new venture, including a web page of the May 21 announcement. In its place, the company had a message Monday that said the page 'is temporarily down due to a court order' and added: 'We don't agree with the complaint and are reviewing our options.' IYO CEO Jason Rugolo applauded the ruling Monday in a written statement that said the startup will aggressively protect its brand and tech investments. 'IYO will not roll over and let Sam and Jony trample on our rights, no matter how rich and famous they are,' Rugolo said. Wednesdays Columnist Jen Zoratti looks at what's next in arts, life and pop culture. —— The Associated Press and OpenAI have a licensing and technology agreement that allows OpenAI access to part of AP's text archives.
