DETAILS and FURTHER ADDITIONAL INFORMATION on the CASES

witness,complex,DETAILS and FURTHER ADDITIONAL INFORMATION on the CASES
Present document contains detailed and/or additional information in connection with the crimes committed in regards of the companies listed under Chapter I.

Further information provided in regards of other – relevant - cases of certain companies and persons; including the involved liquidators, further cooperatives and representatives of authorities, courts, certain politicians.

Names, indications and references made to the translation of the Accusation dated as of 19th September 2007 (“Accusation”) shall bear the meaning as defined thereof, except in the case of the definitions and references whose meanings were implied explicitly by the present document.

Please note that however the present document and the above mentioned Accusation contains a unity as a matter of fact, due to the translation of the complex materials and further relevant duties we may provide the present document just by now.



I. Details of the core-cases
The present chapter deals with the some additional information on the most noteworthy cases which shall be deemed essential for the understanding of the functioning of the crime organization involved.


I.1. EURO MÖBEL LINE Kft “fa.”

1. On the premises of the Kecskemét, Hungary based furniture factory, Euro Möbel Line Kft there are 15.000 m2 of edifices (including 10.000 m2 halls with heating system and office buildings). To provide a rough idea on the market value: an other premise in the same area, however a much smaller plot (i.e. only 20% of size of the above premise), without the technological means and/or buildings, was realised a few months ago for 30 million HUF in a liquidation procedure. The realization of the example premise was under the effect of the Hungarian Bankruptcy Act, thus implies that the every relevant aspect of the two cases (realizations of the two premises) may be correlated.

2. The two premises are differ in size (46.000 m2 / 2.300 m2) and installed buildings ratio of the whole territory (15.000 m2 / 750 m2), whereas the first real-estate is fully provided by public services and various goods, the other contains much less value in these regards.

3. Conclusively the realization of the real-estate of Euro Möbel Line Kft by the MFB Rt on a price of 80 million HUF – in contradiction to the milliard HUF value estimated value – is a conspicuously established sale on asymmetric value, which was realized against the good morals, constituting the breach of both the rights of creditors and the members (shareholders) .

4. The investigation which was ordered due to my accusation recorded at the Supreme Office of Prosecution on 15th of February 2005 (under No. KF9881), and the investigation which was ordered due to my accusation recorded at the Kecskemét City Prosecution Office on 18th of April 2005 were joined under Criminal Investigation No. 47/2005.

5. The accusation registered under No. KF9881 was dealing with the subject matter of the financial crimes committed on the loss of Euro Möbel Line Kft, which company was owned by me.

6. The Department of Preferential Cases of the Supreme Office of Prosecution have transferred the case (based on jurisdiction) to the Metropolitan Prosecution Office of the Advocate General and to the Bács-Kiskun County Prosecution Office of the Advocate General. At the former, the head of the Department of Financial and Preferential Cases – Mrs. SZABADVÁRINÉ dr. Katalin Vámos –, have made her decision (under No. Küo. 5497/2005/1.) on the denial of the accusing claim in regards of the I-IV. sections of the accusation. In respect of section V thereof (on minor delinquency as the liquidator of Euro Möbel Line Kft (namely: Duna Libra Kft ) provided unlawful advantage for the part of Berta Kft - a company supplied security services for Euro Möbel Line Kft - in regards of the latter’s claims) the investigation was initiated.

7. It was stated in the decision that blackmailing and extortion may be acknowledged if in the accusation it can be proven factually that violence and threaten occurred, however I only stated that the psychical extortion was realized. Further it was claimed that the right for acquire (right of option) was not used to secure unlawful advantage, rather than to secure the payback of the credit in regards of the Hungarian Bank for Development (“MFB”) .

8. The truth is, that the above statement is completely false: The right of acquire designated the right to acquire 49% of the shares of the company (Euro Möbel Line Kft) for the price of 1.000,-HUF, whereas the registered value is 26 million HUF, but they actual value would be cc. 750 million HUF. It does not change the impact of this right, that it involves only the 49% of the shares.

9. The MFB refused to provide a credit value of 200 million HUF, which was contractually undertaken by the bank itself. Instead the MFB acquired 51% of the shares on registered value (27 million HUF). Thus the rest 173 million HUF was transferred to it’s subsidiaries, thus to itself. Eventually the shares were transferred to private persons as it will be detailed below.

10. These facts may be comprehended as not constituting a breach of Section 1 of Article 252 of the Criminal Code of Hungary, but certainly represent the aiding of such crime, which falls under identical sentence.

11. Additional information in that regard the Mr. András VINCZE, who was sole owner of the Saye Kft – much before the privatization – which company later won the tender. However I have attached the issue of Népszabadság as of 2nd of February 2005, which included the declaration of Mr. VINCZE, with such a content (i.e.: that the Saye Kft belongs to him) that it may be called a confession. Conclusively to the above, there should be an investigation ex officio initiated.

12. In regards of the denying decision of Mrs. SZABADVÁRI, I have filed an objection, however Dr. Zoltán PÉTER, prosecutor of the Supreme Office of Prosecution denied the request as well.

13. In this decision such odd logic was followed: “if the member-companies of the portfolio are not examined, than Mr. VINCZE is not member of MBV Rt .”

14. References made to judicial cases were not-relevant and may not considered as effective to this regards. There was an additional private-accusation filed at the Municipal Court, which for two years is ignored.

15. As of the objection filed on 26th of January 2007 in regards of B.1702/2005/33-V.: the decision on the termination of investigation refers to the fact that the felony of improper use shall be deemed as fully carried out if intentionality occurred when committing the crime. Later explains why intentionality allegedly lacked in this case. However by the law even the negligent form of such crime is to be punished, thus intentionality shall not be required.

16. Furthermore the investigation in regards of the assets so acquired, and that if it were handled and received as stolen-property, was as well ceased – based on the logic that if the assets were not handled with an improper manner, than there shall be no crime as receiving stolen property. Nevertheless the law states that in order to carry out the crime of receiving such property, it suffices if that involved person is aware of the illegally acquired nature of the assets. Furthermore the improper use by Mrs. PINTÉR (was born as Ildikó EÖTVÖS) has been completed according to the relevant Hungarian regulations.

17. The judge appointed at the Szeged City Court was Mrs. ILA-TÓTH Dr. Erika Vörös, who set out as a fact that the crime of providing unlawful advantage for a particular creditor has occurred, in regards of Berta Kft, thus the rights of the rest of the creditors were breached, nevertheless the request of sequestration of the assets was denied. The ground for denial was that I am not part of the creditors, however the Bács-Kiskun County Court decided otherwise which became final. Furthermore the law requires not the status of creditor, but the status of aggrieved party in order that such request may be filed.

18. Further to the final decision on my rights as creditor, I have well-founded claims for movables as well and additional reimbursement to be claimed for in civil court procedures.

19. Thus I was more eligible – based on material law – to request the sequestration than many creditors. Which latter would be unquestionably in compliance with the law, as the felony of receipt of stolen goods was repeatedly carried out, whereas these goods shall be seized and may be confiscated or in case sequestrated.

20. It shall be noted, that if the above request for sequestration and further requests aiming to have the assets secured, the application for obtaining evidences (in particular during the Case No. 191/2006 in front of the Central Investigation Prosecution Office of the Advocate General) would have been taken into consideration and conclusive steps followed by, than the felony in question would not occur or not occur more than an intent of committing such crime.

21. In regards of how the actual crime was carried out, it shall be mentioned that the internal information on the purchase price of Euro Möbel Line Kft may be disclosed by Mr. OROSZ or Mrs. MARTON .

22. The testimony of Dr. Gyula RUSZÓ , under Criminal Investigation No. 149/2006/ record no. 7-11, recorded on 12th May 2006 is sufficient evidence for the personal relationships, prohibited support and assistance:
“… the Civil Biztonsági Szolgálat Zrt – where Mr. PINTÉR is member at – purchased the Berta Kft, which was dealing with assets-securing. The company provided services for the part of Euro Möbel Line Kft for a value of 22 million HUF, which was not settled by the latter. Thus this sum was requested to be compensated…” This compensation was accomplished during the liquidation procedure, which procedure is ipso iure prohibited. Even more controversial that the compensation incorporated a sum of 30 million (30.000.000) HUF value instead of the original 22 million HUF.

23. In the above regard there were charges pressed, however only in regards of the actual suspects, but not in regards of those actually governing that achievement of the crime. Even Mr. PINTÉR indicated that it may seem rather controversial to acquire a company through liquidation procedure, which company is secured by his own security company. Therefore the Berta Kft (at that time already belonged to Mr. PINTÉR) was replaced on the 20th January 2006 by Árgus Security Kft .

24. The ÁPV Rt was owner of the MBV Rt, which later became majority member of the Euro Möbel Line Kft (whereas the company was under liquidation procedure).

25. It was recorded by the registered expert witness auditor, that MBV Rt acquired the shares based on a loan contract which may be considered as a usury-contract.

26. The liquidator committed mismanagement and/or negligent care of the assets, and provided an unlawful advantage for the part of Mr. Sándor PINTÉR’s (former minister of internal affairs) Immobile 2000 Kft. Whereas the latter company acquired for a sum of 80 million (80.000.000) HUF, the assets with value of (according to the financing bank) 922 million (922.000.000) HUF, in addition which assets contained third party property as well. In that period not even the first (i.e.: classified as “A”) category creditors have been reimbursed, and naturally not have been reimbursed the further creditors of lower classes.

27. To summarize the illegitimate practice: Kossuth Holding Rt managed that a subsidiary/ trustful company may acquire the right of option, thus imposing the open tender - in regards of obtaining the assets of the Euro Möbel Line Kft - to be unreasonable. In the present case it was the Saye Kft which obtained that right. The latter belonged - rather controversially - to Mr. András VINCZE (who has close contact with the MFB Rt. thus the crediting bank, via a subsidiary of thereof, called the MBV Rt , whereas Mr. VINCZE was an officer).

28. The loan provided by the MFB Rt, due to which the shares of the company should had been sold. The latte transaction was examined by registered expert witness who considered the business asymmetric and usury in its nature.


I.2. AGRIA Rt.

29. An outstanding loss caused by the liquidation of Agria Rt., a furniture manufacturing company based in Eger, Hungary.

30. The assets of the company were acquired by Szendrő Invest Kft (established in 1995, most probably for the main purpose of acquire the property of Agria Rt). The members of Szendrő Invest Kft – which not surprisingly became the appointed party at the tender – are still leaders or supervisors of the Kossuth Holding Rt., the appointed liquidator in regards of Agria Rt.

31. The remained assets of the Agria Rt were acquired by the BA-MAT Kft (proprietor: Mr. István BALÁZS), which led to the Agria Ba-Mat Kft. This latter belonged to a French/German investment group (via the Arte Casa Kft) and eventually went to bankruptcy in March 2001.

I.3. Pepszolg

32. In connection of the Fűzfői Papírgyár transaction (i.e. acquiring the factory), Konzum Bank (a subsidiary of the State-owned MFB Bank Rt) offered credit, whereas the guarantee and security of the credit was two real-estates which have belonged to the property of the Pesterzsébeti Papírgyár (subsidiary of the former paper-business related corporation owned by the Hungarian State).

33. These two real-estate were oddly accepted:
on one hand, the plot to be found in nature under Helsinki út 101 at Budapest was to be cover for 300 million (300.000.000) HUF valued credit, whereas the entry on the proprietary-sheet of the real-estate was due to a declaration dated as of 1996 and later as of 2001 by the president of the National Property Agency (“ÁVÜ”). Both declarations were false and fraudulent, furthermore they were in contradiction with one and other.
on the other hand the real-estate to be found in nature at Irma utca No. 2. at Budapest, which was to be cover for 30 million (30.000.000) HUF valued credit (which was drawn down at 26th February of 2002). Credits were granted for shares in State-owned companies in value of several millions of HUF. In addition the real-estate were acquired due a series of unlawful acts during the privatization of certain State-owned companies, and these real-estate were later provided as cover for the credits granted for the purchase of the remained assets of certain State-owned companies. The involved groups of people and companies were almost identical.

34. However, the executors of the above contracts were responsible in person (in the form of surety) for the 400 million (400.000.000) HUF value these securities were never claimed for.

35. In fact Ingatlan’98 Kft , subsidiary of Reorg Apport Rt (which indeed is a subsidiary of the Reorg Rt, a State owned company) acquired the real-estate located at Irma utca No. 2, Budapest from seller Remington Kft . Nevertheless Remington Kft claimed to have proprietary rights based on its predecessor’s right. In spite of the fact that the court stated in August 2007 explicitly that nor Remington Kft, neither its predecessor had right for the title of the real-estates. Eventually Ingatlan’98 Kft withdraw from the transaction, thus lost the 30 million (30.000.000) HUF deposit. No claims were ever made in that regards, however the default occurred on the seller’s side.

36. In the above regards there was an other extraordinary practice: The deposit was transferred in the name of Mr. Sándor PINTÉR, by Ingatlan’98 Kft to the predecessor of Remington Kft (i.e.: Pesterzsébeti Papírgyár Kft). However the payment was transferred directly to Vectigalis Rt (liquidator of the Fűzfői Papíripari Rt. ) In this way the Hungarian State financed Mr. PINTÉR’s transaction and obtaining an other real-estate.

I.4. Hajdu-BÉT Rt

37. Hajdu-BÉT Rt had been the country’s foremost goose and duck product providing company. One of the main financing source was the OTP Bank (the most important and far most popular bank in Hungary). However as the company management were not following a successful practice, OTP Bank had sold its shares to Wallis Zrt (member of OTP Bank).

38. The new member (Wallis Zrt) was not intend to initiate a non-profitable business, therefore replaced the burden of the debts on the suppliers – causing the most significant series of bankruptcy among suppliers on the field, posing several personal tragedies as well. The above practice effected adversely more than thousand families.

39. In order that the assets of the company may be acquired, there were several fraudulent acts carried out, such as alteration of dates, debts towards “phantom-companies”. In this respect Ms. Zsuzsa MAKRANCZY played an important role during the asset-acquire in October – November 2004. She works for the Duna Libra Zrt (and via the above to the Kossuth Holding Rt ). It was inevitable that the documents covered the majority of the assets, as that time it was not clear who will be designated to be the liquidator for the company.

40. As soon as the Hunyadi Rt was appointed to be the liquidator the transactions were rather simple, as the Hunyadi Rt belongs to the same sphere as the Kossuth Holding.

41. In practice the manner that a “trustful” liquidator will be appointed was secured as follows: Hajdu-BÉT Rt was seated in Hajdu Bihar County, thus belonged under the competence of the County’s company court. Therefore when the court decided (by its non-final decision) that the liquidation shall be initiated, this decision was appealed and simultaneously was requested the transfer of the seat to Kecskemét (belongs to the competence of Bács-Kiskun County). By coincidence the new seat was in the same building as the future liquidator (not yet appointed). The documents were transferred to Kecskemét at 4th February 2005. The company unexpectedly requested its own liquidation, and even tough that the court had no possibility to inspect the documents thereof (as they were not available for the court at that date of the decision as of 19th January 2005) the liquidation was ordered.

42. Thus it can be stated, that in the case of the liquidation of Hajdu-BÉT Rt., Judge VARGA appointed the liquidator however the transfer of seat of the company was yet not filed, and thus Judge VARGA may have not decide lawfully on the appointment. It is know that the assets of the Hajdu-BÉT Rt was acquired by a company related to Mr. MAGYARI (see further below), under the seat of Bécsi Road 5, Budapest, Hungary.

I.5. Fűzfői Papíripari Rt.

43. In regards of the liquidation of the Fűzfői Papíripari Rt, Mrs. SZEGŐ Judit Kemerle was appointed as liquidator in the name of the Vectigális Rt. Nevertheless, when the company assets were realized and a new privately owned paper factory went into operation, Mrs. SZEGŐ were employed as an auditor from May 2003 until May 2006.

44. Obtaining the company in 2002, the series of unlawful operation of the company and related serious felonies were all without any legal consequence, in spite of the notable damage and the disclosed facts of crimes against the order of justice. (Cf. I.3.; II. 59.)


II. Further involved companies and details of the unlawful practice

45. I have became aware of (certain limited elements of) the extended network of a crime-organization due to the crediting and liquidation of SZKIV Glória Rt and the Euro Möbel Line Kft. These two companies operated with the same storage-premises.
46. In 2006 I have met with Mr. Zoltán MINDA and Mr. István BALÁZS, as well I was explained how have the liquidation/final settlement occurred in their cases (Pepszolg Kft and Agria Ba-Mat Kft respectively).

47. Further due to the detailed description contained in the initiative filed by Dr. Gábor HAVAS attorney-at-law, it became clear and verified, how did the crime-organization functioned.

48. The companies Kossuth Holding Rt, Hunyadi Rt, Novum Kft and Duna Libra Rt are all liquidating companies with different members (share holders), thus according to the investigating authorities they are independent companies. However in fact, they all controlled by two persons: Dr. József MAGYARI and Mr. Zoltán VÁRADI.

49. Nevertheless if the above mentioned two individuals are not in connection with the above mentioned companies, than on what basis have they became involved in liquidation procedures governed by these companies to which – according to the information gained through the investigation – they have no actual connection.

50. The linkage – in compliance to the company data as registered at the Court of company registration indicates no more than the mother-in-law of Mr. MAGYARI as the sole linkage between Novum Kft and certain liquidation procedures driven by Kossuth Holding Rt.

51. In regards of the Euro Möbel Line Kft, the shares once belonged to SZKIV Glória Rt were acquired by Factum ‘99 Rt (also part of the sphere of interest of Mr. MAGYARI) from the Gold Sofa Kft in 2001, just before the liquidation procedure was initiated. Subsequently the SZKIV Glória Rt was liquidated by the Hunyadi Rt, which as well belongs to the sphere of interest of Mr. MAGYARI.

52. Not surprisingly the liquidation of Gold Sofa Kft was governed by the same group of companies. Thereafter, the Euro Möbel Line Kft (which based it’s seat and property on the former real-estate and property of the SZKIV Glória Rt) was liquidated by the Duna Libra Rt (also belongs to Mr. MAGYARI).

53. Dishonourably, if requested by certain interest-group (supported by strong political background), the management of companies which were purposely guided to bankruptcy (in order to obtain property or refund tax fraudulently etc) may be exempted from responsibility.

54. Furthermore, these people undertake notable influence in companies (against the definite competition law regulations on the matter) and finance political party-funds. Mr. MAGYARI has obtained control in several companies under his own name and through other means as well. For instance: In addition to the above mentioned: Szentgál és Vidéke Takarékszövetkezet, Eurofaktor etc.

55. The above mentioned were explained and revealed for my part by Mr. Ferenc TÓTH and Mr. József MAGYARI in March 2001. This information was justified by the recently occurred events, whereas the fact that Mr. MAGYARI does indeed decide on significant matters (even if through certain appointed persons) should be apparent for the part of involved individuals (such as politicians, bankers, leaders/owners of liquidated companies, liquidators).

56. For instance Mr. EIGEL Antal – former liquidator of the Duna Libra Rt –, has provided detailed testimony for the police, where in regards of Mr. MAGYARI there were the artificially chosen liquidators and the related fraudulent appointment of liquidator managers mentioned.

57. This latter speculation was underpinned by the rather odd desire of a creditor bank in an infamous (milliard forint worthy) asset-settlement procedure (i.e. the bankruptcy of the Transelektro Group ), whereas the appointment of Mr. Magyari was requested as a prerequisite for further negotiations. In this case his role is obviously not to protect the 70 milliard (70.000.000.000) HUF value State-loss, much more precisely the protection of certain private bank’s interest (for instance: Raiffeisen Bank).

58. It was customary, that when notable assets were subject of the future liquidation – as a result of the unreasonable company status and change of seat, just prior to the liquidation had been ordered – a member of the Kossuth Holding group was appointed to be the liquidator of the case. In practice even tough a factory and the storage of a company were at a certain location, the seat of the company was transferred (just before the liquidation procedure) to a city (mainly Tatabánya) to be found in Komárom–Esztergom County. Thus the competence of the Komárom-Esztergom County Company Court was established, and certain judges, such as Judge Potrátovics and the above mentioneds, appointed a member of the Kossuth Holding group.

59. In certain cases (for instance in the case of “Fűzfői Papíripari Rt”) the assets and the financial conditions of the company were supported by the Hungarian State, soon after which, a company related to Mr. János PINTÉR acquired the company.

60. The latter company was a well-known company with good reputation – not long time after a buy-out financed by a State-owned financial institution and the company reorganized and allegedly with success – the seat of the company was transferred to a place which is commonly called “escape-office”. By coincidence it was so, and it was palpable by the final decision (as of 2007) in a certain related case initiated in 2005, that the outstandingly high valued assets of certain paper industry related companies (formerly owned by the Hungarian State) were acquired by a company-group, which included many “phantom-companies ” as well. (First Empire Investment Kft., First Empire Investments Kft., Fűzfői Papíripari Rt., Nitrokémia Rt., Nitrokémia Invest, Hazai Papír Kft., etc.).

61. By the transfer of seat in 2006 a new court was able to establish its competence, the Court has appointed the Kossuth Holding Rt in January 2007to act as liquidator.

62. The STYL Rt at Szombathely was liquidated based on a debt which was acquired by Faktum ’99 Kft. Against the relevant Hungarian legal regulation, the Vectigális Rt was appointed to be liquidator.

63. In connection with the above matter there was an other rather ambiguous transaction occurred: to acquire the factory, a State-owned bank (i.e.: Konzum Bank, subsidiary of MFB Bank Rt) offered credit, whereas the guarantee and security of the credit was two real-estates which have belonged to the property of the Pesterzsébeti Papírgyár (subsidiary of the former paper-business related corporation owned by the Hungarian State). (Cf. Chapter I.3)

64. Eventually it can bet stated, that both of the indicated State granted credits were misplaced as the debtors could not settle the debts, nonetheless the assets of the Fűzfői Papírgyár Rt. were acquired dully. Afterwards the assets re-appeared and used in books of different phantom-companies, unfortunately the former State-owned corporation was again to go under liquidation. Surprisingly the liquidator was the Kossuth Holding Rt, even tough was providing the financial background in 2001-02 for the purchase of the company trough the assets of the Pesterzsébeti Papírgyár Kft (which latter was privatized in 1994).

65. The Pesterzsébeti Papírgyár Kft went to liquidation proceedings (partly due to the above mentioned and eventually lost credits), with legal effect from 30th April 2003. And liquidator was the Kossuth Holding Rt.

66. Consequently happened that the liquidator filed an accusation and requested compensation and the invalidity of prior contracts to be set-out, however not in regards of the actual-value bearing real-estate, but only in regards of business share (quota) without proper clarification of rights for title and without permission for the subject property to trade with.

67. Conclusively many of the former assets of the Sate-owned corporation became to be handled and operated by the Kossuth Holding Rt, which already used them directly or through indirectly owned companies, for several unlawful transactions, including the more than 330 million (330.000.000) HUF total value of credits, illegitimate entries in the real-estate proprietary documentation. In this regard the Kossuth Holding Rt and it’s leaders unlikely to support the court with proper evidence in regards of two relevant court cases, or in connection with the Satelit TV Case (which played an important role in the outrage of the international Siemens scandal).

68. The Factum’99 Kft belongs to Mr. MAGYARI, which company has purchased the shares of the SZKIV Glória Rt, before the liquidation thereof. Thus Mr. MAGYARI managed to liquidate his own company (in contrary to the prohibition contained by the relevant rules of the Hungarian Bankruptcy Act ) This fact was never investigated, ignored by all authorities.

69. Unfortunately the above practice of Mr. MAGYARI is not single-standing.



III. Involved personals and their form of involvement

70. In one of the several procedures Mr. MAGYARI declared that he has never known an individual called Mrs. HÖFLE. However this statement was not recorded at the Bács-Kiskun County Police Department, by now it is unquestionable that Mr. MAGYARI was lying. The two of them worked for many years together. The documents in regards of acquiring the assets of AGRIA Rt by BA-MAT Kft (proprietor: Mr. István BALÁZS) prove unquestionably that Mr. MAGYARI and Mrs. HÖFLE were cooperating for decades and were co-members of various companies.

71. Furthermore Mrs. HÖFLE were acting according to the instructions of Mr. József MAGYARI in regards of R-FACTUM Kft , Hungária Hitel és Factorház Rt. and in Quattro Kft , were she was member of the above companies along with the relatives of Mr. MAGYARI, among them the mother-in-law of him (Mrs. SZOMBATHELYI), who was also a member (and for some period manager) in the Novum Kft and the Kossuth Holding Rt .

72. According to the reports on examinations, the investigating authorities never inquired what does Mrs. HÖFLE knows and in what relationship is she with Mr. MAGYARI. However there were many contradictions in connection with the provided information, the confrontation of the two never occurred.

73. On 5th of January 2005 I was confronted with Mr. Magyari in regards of the Investigation No. 200/2004 at the Bács-Kiskun County Police Department. There I declared that until January 2002 we were in contact on a daily basis with the employees of Kossuth Holding Rt (among others: Mr. Zoltán VÁRADI; Mrs. Béla HÖFLE). They were inspecting and supervising our business weekly – monthly. The short response of Mr. MAGYARI was that he has not given any instruction to anyone.

74. Furthermore it was not taken into record from our discussion that Mr. MAGYARI was accompanied by Mrs. Béla HÖLE from the Airport at Matkó (close to Kecskemét) to Budaörs on his Cseszna type private-plane. This latter was denied by him and also the fact the he has ever known her.

75. Oddly Mrs. HÖFLE has testified so at the Criminal division of the Police Department of Nagykanizsa a few months thereafter (on 21st of April 2005): “I have met only once with Dr. József MAGYARI. He was the leader of the Kossuth Holding Rt, but I was not in touch with him.”

76. By now it is proven fact that Mrs. Béla HÖFLE undoubtedly provided a fraudulent testimony.

77. In September 2004 I have made a confession, accusing myself with bribing under force. The Bács-Kiskun County Police Department due to my accusation has carried out investigation under No. 200/2004, and in the followings sent a proposal for charges to be raised for the part of the Kecskemét City Prosecution Office. The Prosecution Office has not raised charges against Dr. József MAGYARI, however it has been revealed during the investigation without leaving any doubt in regards, that he was the head of a crime organization which have committed serious felonies.

78. The location of the incident concerning the confession – i.e. the committed crime – was the office of Hunyadi Rt at Uzsoki Road. Nevertheless, the leader (Ms. Ágnes HAJDÚ) of the named company has not been consulted weather Dr. József MAGYARI (who had received the bribing sum) was present when the contracts in regards of Euro Möbel Line Kft have been signed at 19th January 2002. Contradictory, Mr. MAGYARI not only denied the fact of the bribery, but denied the he ever been in the indicated office. Nevertheless, I have not been stated that the sum was furnished in front of Ms. HAJDÚ, as she has been in another office during that time. But according to her testimony, it may be proven that Mr. MAGYARI was in the office on the date in question, thus his creditability seems to be questionable.

79. One member of Hungária Hitel és Faktorház is the R-FACTUM Kft, whereas Mrs. Béla HÖFLE is member and representative of the company. She introduced me (by the end of 2001 or the beginning of 2002, at Kecskemét) to Ms. Mariann KONRÁD, as assistant and girlfriend of Mr. József MAGYARI. There was even a king-size bed made for their part.

80. Mr. MAGYARI was the one who organized that I became introduced to Mr. István KRUZICS, Mr. János MESTER, Mr. Péter KUNOS and Mr. Tibor BAKÓ – who participated as the representatives of CIVIS Credit, financing the SZKIV Glória Rt. This financing constituted from factoring invoices, for which the guarantee was provided by Mr. MAGYARI. He proposed this to me as well, indicating that “it is a good investment”.

81. Mr. MAGYARI declared falsely as well that he is not in contact with Mr. TÓTH, nevertheless Mr. BASA-SZABÓ (a police officer) stated in his testimony that he tends to meet with Mr. TÓTH at the dinners given by Mr. MAGYARI, regularly for more than 100 people.

82. Mr. MAGYARI declared in his testimony recorded on 20th December 2004 at the Bács-Kiskun County Police Department that “I know no individual named Mr. Lajos RÁCZ.” Nevertheless at the confrontation at the same place but on 5th January 2005 between the Mr. MAGYARI and Mr. Lajos RÁCZ, the former stated: “Yes, I am familiar with this person, and I will use the formal addressing towards this person.”

83. Conclusively it can be seen clearly, that Mr. MAGYARI stated repeatedly false information for the part of different authorities.

84. In the testimony of Mr. MAGYARI recorded during the investigation of the criminal Case 200/2004 on 20th December 2004, he declared: “… I am familiar with Mr. Zoltán KOVÁCS, as he was working in the bank some time ago, from where I know him; furthermore I am aware of that he is a strategic director of the Globus Rt. I meet with him occasionally on protocol events, but we are not in any business relationship – neither as companies, nor as private persons. As if it is inquired, I declare, that I have no knowledge what common matter have or may have Mr. KOVÁCS and Mr. BORBÉLY József, and I know not why Mr. BORBÉLY required that I inform Mr. KOVÁCS…”

85. Nonetheless, the statement made by Mr. MAGYARI is false as they know each other with Mr. KOVÁCS for much longer time as it was indicated by Mr. MAGYARI. They have worked together by the liquidation of the Békéscsabai Konzervgyár Rt., along with Ms. Éva KARKUS.

86. Rather questionably practice that the seat of Duna Libra Rt (subsidiary of Kossuth Holding Rt) was transferred (by the end of 2003, beginning of 2004) to the address (1062 Budapest, Andrássy út 91.) of Ms. Éva KERKUS, and later she was employed as liquidator(-manager) at the same company from April 2005. Further she testified as so on 18th of May 2006 at the Kecskemét Prosecution Office of Investigation under Criminal Case No. 149/2006 Record no.7-12: “At the time we were living at Békéscsaba, and I was working at the Békescsaba department of Kossuth Holding Rt as assistant-liquidator, which was similar job than to be a liquidator.”

87. The mentioned period indicates that she and Mr. MAGYARI were already very much familiar with each other, as he has controlled directly Kossuth Holding Rt during that time. In addition the registered seat of Duna Libra Rt at her private apartment suspects that there were a very trustful relationship already existing.

88. With the above false statement Mr. MAGYARI desired to hold concealed the fact that via Mr. KOVÁCS – who was manager director of the Duna Libra Rt. –, he could control the company; and further that is why Mr. MAGYARI interested in assigning the Duna Libra Rt to be the liquidator of Euro Möbel Line Kft (with the inevitable assistance of Dr. VARGA Miklós, judge of the court of company registration).

89. Mr. Ferenc TÓTH (former liquidator) has declared in his testimony as of 5th May 2006, recorded at Investigating Prosecution Office of Kecskemét: “I have got to know Mr. Zoltán KOVÁCS by the end of the 90’s, at the time when I became the board member of the Békéscsabai Konzervgyár Rt, where we worked together. I occurred to know that he is the CEO of Duna Libra Rt.”

90. When liquidating the Békéscsabai Konzervgyár Rt, Mr. MAGYARI, Mr. KOVÁCS, Mr. TÓTH and Ms. Éva KARKUS were working together, which was admitted by Ms. KARKUS in one of her testimonies. Thus after months of cooperation it would be rather surprising, if they would not know each other personally.

91. In addition the new seat of Duna Libra Rt is registered under the address of Ms. KARKUS to be found at Andrássy út 91., Budapest.

92. Furthermore in the written testimony in regards of Criminal Investigation No. 200/2004 as of 30th December 2004 of Mr. Ferenc TÓTH, he states that he became in touch with SZKIV Glória Rt by the request of Ms. Ágnes HAJDÚ.

93. I was confronted with Mr. MAGYARI as of 5th of January 2005 in regards of Criminal Investigation No. 200/2004. My declaration was so: “I am telling face to face that we have met prior to the liquidation of SZKIV Glória Rt, where Mr. Ferenc TÓTH was present as well. This meeting occurred in the office of Mr. TÓTH, during which we have discussed that the liquidation of SZKIV Glória Rt will be carried out by Hunyadi Rt. – you will manage that this liquidator company will be appointed.”

94. Mr. József MAGYARI has stated: “I am telling you face to face that we have met prior to the liquidation, whereas we have analyzed the numbers of your company….” Thus Mr. MAGYARI acknowledges that we (him, Mr. TÓTH and me) have met before the liquidation. Thus disproved the statement of Mr. TÓTH, and Mr. TÓTH has not informed primarily by Ms. HAJDÚ on the fact of the liquidation, but was aware of that much before.

95. In fact he, Mr. MAGYARI and Judge Miklós VARGA have arranged who shall be appointed for liquidation. Mr. VARGA decided that the liquidator shall be the Hunyadi Rt (as well as it was his decision based on the request of Mr. MAGYARI that the BUBIV Kft shall be liquidated by certain “trustful” liquidator company).

96. In the case of the liquidation of Hajdu-BÉT Rt., Judge VARGA appointed the liquidator however the transfer of seat of the company was yet not filed, and thus Judge VARGA may have not decide lawfully on the appointment. (Cf. Chapter I.4.)

97. Dr. László BODÓCZKI, president of the Bács-Kiskun County Court was some time ago (before the political changes and democratization of 1989) secretary of the communist party of Szeged. That established his good relationship with many important personalities. Further he is in close relationship with Mr. HARAJKA (head of the Prosecution Office), who is in touch with Mr. PINTÉR.

98. Mr. MAGYARI is the godfather of the daughter of Mr. Ferenc TÓTH . They cooperated on the liquidation of Fémmunkás Vállalat of Kecskemét. This latter company was a significant and rather notably corporation, thus working together indicates strong relationship.

99. Mr. TÓTH was a member of the Hunyadi Rt’s board of inspectors – as well as acting liquidator, which company was appointed to the liquidator of Hajdu-BÉT Rt and SZKIV Glória Rt.

100. Mr. TÓTH was the supervisor of Mr. László BALOGH, when working in the county’s communist party organization before the democratization of 1989. Mr. BALOGH was the president of the Bács-Kiskun County general assembly during the government period of 2002-2006, and prior to that a prosecutor.

101. It is undoubted that Mr. BALOGH as a member of the parliament, president of the general assembly should have certain responsibility and interest in regards of the territory he is working at. However even the various personal and official requests to him, he provided only empty promises, but have not achieved anything. As the crimes what I was reporting of, were underpinned by various documents, he should have at least initiate an investigation in reference to the matter. In the contrary, he impeded the investigation and that the true nature of such negotiations will be ever revealed: when Mr. István IVANICS (member of the parliament) addressed a question (during a session of the general assembly) to Dr. Ferenc KIRÁLY of the Bács-Kiskun County Police Department, in reference to the “robbery” of the “Kecskemét Furniture Factory” by Mr. Sándor PINTÉR, Mr. BALOGH prevented Mr. KIRÁLY to answer the question, and when Mr. IVANICS repeated his question, he simply switched off his microphone.

102. As of the credit matters, liquidations where MFB Rt was involved, I have provided detailed description to the part of Mr. Ferenc GYURCSÁNY , Mr. Péter MEDGYESSI and Mr. Viktor ORBÁN , however none of them initiated any necessary steps, in spite of the seriousness of the matter and the documentary proof provided.

103. Dr. József MAGYARI is well-known lobbyist of the MSZP , additionally member of the directors’ board of the Corvinus Rt, which is owned by the MFB Rt. It is a typical condition that the leaders of certain entities in the sphere of interest of Mr. MAGYARI are all members of directors’ and inspectors’ board, such as Mr. Ferenc TÓTH and Mr. Zoltán KOVÁCS.

104. Dr. János OROSZ was working at the police department, where the investigation – in regards of the K&H bank crimes – were ceased against
Dr. János ERŐS, present manager director of MFB Rt. Dr. OROSZ at the moment is security-director of the MFB Rt.

105. Mr. OROSZ and his coworker, Mrs. József MARTON raised libels against me, including money-laundering of sums originated from oil-cleaning , in regards of which they initiated a criminal procedure. These individuals stated that two former prosecutor, at the present time lawyers, collected a certain sum of money for my part from the above illegitimate source, which sum I have allegedly used during my business investments. Thus it is likely that the internal information on the purchase price of Euro Möbel Line Kft may be disclosed by Mr. OROSZ or Mrs. MARTON.

106. Both of them are member of the Civil Biztonsági Szolgálat Zrt (owned by Mr. PINTÉR), and were members thereof much before the MFB Rt became member of the company. In that regards there is a criminal procedure pending - based on my accusation - in front of the Kecskemét City Court.

107. The involvement of Dr. Sándor PINTÉR is apparent in regards of the above cases, whereas I was referring in the mentioned documents, particularly meaning the repeated abuse of official power at the Bács-Kiskun County’s investigation authorities – as for instance when referring to certain data, based on final decisions of the court, a new procedure was initiated against the victim/aggrieved party.

108. First case: financial activity and providing of services without permission, which series of crimes were without any consequence. More precisely the Jógazda Bank Zrt is currently carrying out similar activities.

109. Second case: false testimony involvement, whereas Mr. Lajos NAGY was sentenced based on false testimonies, and this fact was verified by final verdict of the court.

110. Third case: certain company documents were filed into the Municipal Court of Company registration with the false signature of Mr. Lajos NAGY, based on which document were posed registered changes in the concerned company’s data. In spite of the consonant opinion of the registered expert witnesses, the individual, who carried out the forgery and used those documents was known and recognized by the police authorities.

111. The persons involved in the forgery claimed that Dr. Sándor PINTÉR was contracting by his very own signature their company group acting as Head of the National Police Department.


IV. Seeking remedies

IV.1. Law enforcement and investigating authorities


112. The Bács-Kiskun County Police Department “carried out” investigation in regards of the Criminal Case 47/2005, which lasted for more than 2 years. Oddly the officials of the authority were followed strange practice during the investigation, which is indicated vividly by the below example:

113. I have taken a testimony of accusation in the above case at the Police Department’s Economy-protection Section, personally for Lieutenant Colonel Vendel SZABÓ, acting as the assistant-head of the Section governing the investigation, that Mr. PINTÉR (his company) is already appointed to be the buyer of the company on a price not reaching not even 10% of it’s worth, and that the tendering was illegitimate. He responded: “See, Mr. Borbély, if we look out the window and we see a thief standing next to a car, in his pockets the thief-keys, and we do not wait until he opens the door – than we have no more than accusation.” At that time I have accepted this logic.

114. Nevertheless when I turned to him on 16th March 2006, when “the thief” (Mr. PINTÉR) is actually “running the car”, i.e. depleting the furniture company completely and transporting the machines and other equipments, he stated that they are “on the case” and they do their best and use all lawful means in that regards.

115. Yet Mr. PINTÉR accomplished the total acquisition of the factory. In 2006 he became the police-officer of the year.

116. In order to support the surfeited police and prosecution investigation, I have intended to disclose and explain the complex correlation, however the authorities ab ovo do not intend to receive these information as certain source for their assistance. Appeared that it is not my personal capacities or status what makes them refrain using and accepting these information, as my well-experienced and erudite legal representative filed a four pages long detailed, logically constructed explanation, and investigation plan for the part of the Central Investigation Office of Prosecution, which was respectively ignored as well.

117. Based on my 2004 confession, there was a case proceed to charges to be raised, however this case was delayed until 29th of May 2007. As a result thereof the request to terminate the liquidator-status of the involved company may not successfully terminated in due time, thus the company whose leaders were indicated as suspects were able to accomplish their previously initiated unlawful practice which I have objected and indicated the result thereof precisely. I.e. one year prior to the alienation of the liquidation assets in January 2006, I have reported for the part of the leader of the investigation, that in case of the absence of asset-securing measures, the liquidator (-manager) is going to carry out measurements with irreversible impact. These indication and suggestions were without any results.

118. I have been informed, that in order to terminate the criminal procedure where the SZUPI-TÁP Kft is involved as aggrieved party (victim) (which latter was involved in the Hajdú-BÉT Rt liquidation Case, whereas Mr. MAGYARI was involved as well), there has been a “political” agreement concluded in-between the Prosecution Office of the Advocate General and a leader of one of the important right-wing political party, which was extended to the case where Euro Möbel Line Kft has been concerned as well.

119. During the investigation under No. 200/2004, it occurred to me that the investigators have not raised their questions following certain kind of logic and purpose. That time I was not suspecting the concealed motive in that regards, that questions were raised so or there were no essential questions asked at all – i.e. based on the solely seemingly unprofessional questions – that it may not turn out that a felony was ever committed or who may be (who was) the real offender.

120. Contradicting the testimonials and confrontations, accusations have been filed in reference to the former testimonials, thus I have awaited with reasonableness that the professionally adequate investigators would provide the professional minimum. I have only realised the mistakes (which may not committed unintentionally) at the moment of document description , at the end of the investigation. Further, I have realized in the same time that the suspects were never confronted between each other, only with the witnesses. Thus the contradiction posed by the testimonials of the suspects may not and never been solved. In addition certain individuals were examined only as witnesses, however they were involved in committing crime as well. It is possible that these individuals were not involved in bribery but other related felonies (for instance: bankruptcy-crime , fraud). It became obvious that the bribery forced in my case was only a “supportive felony” of the further precisely financial/economical crimes, as bribery is without sense if there is not a financial goal or the anticipation thereof. Thus to take the risk of a lar’t pour lar bribery, and may be involved in such criminal activity seems unreasonable from the point of view of well-educated criminals.

121. That time I have not been aware of the criminal procedure initiated in 2003, in relation with the above mentioned case, because the suspect of the case was playing an important role in a corruption – bribery case, and provided certain services for the part of the group, represented by Mr. MAGYARI. (Such services included: appointment of certain liquidators for the requested liquidation procedures; well-founded liquidation-objections “solved” by rejection etc.) The bribery-case is pending investigation at the Central Investigation Prosecution Office of the Advocate General under Criminal Investigation No. 396/2003. The procedure was terminated in 2004, however due to an accusation filed by me in 2005 and which was split to two separate procedures in 2006, in regards of the Criminal Investigation No. 191/2006 the procedure (396/2003) was continued. Contrary to the customary practice, the investigation was carried out under the original Criminal Investigation No. 396/2003.

122. I have inquired from Ms. Tímea BERKI prosecutor in charge for the investigation, and later in writing as well at the Investigation Prosecution Office of the Advocate General , that if the investigation initiated as a result of my accusation was joined with Criminal Investigation No. 396/2003 Case. Following I have requested to be informed on the subject matter of the investigation, and against who and on what well-founded grounds carried out, and who is it related to my person or to the company represented by me. The response stated that it is against official individual and the Euro Möbel Line Kft is involved in the investigation as well. Further I have requested in writing to be permitted to inquire the file of the case, to which as a victim or aggrieved party I would have opportunity only at document description.

123. In connection to the aforementioned, there is criminal investigation against myself as well, whereas should the accusations filed by me not to be found proven, the possibility of charges of fake claim is upon me. (The investigator officer Mr. Attila VARGA not proposed amongst other charges the charge of guilty in bankruptcy-crime, because at that time the liquidation assets of the company were still possessed and thus – according to Mr. VARGA – if the sale of the assets would have gone well, that could cover the creditors’ requests.) Conclusively it is in my essential interest the fair and complete investigation to be carried out.

124. Thus I consider the practice of Prosecution Office of the Advocate General not responding to my objections and claims until the present day, as a clear violation of my constitutional rights to defend. Further by not permitting the documentation to be studied, besides impeding the protection of the interests of the creditors, my fundamental rights for legal defence is in vague.

125. The investigation under Criminal Investigation No. 191/2006 was split to several investigations so, that the close connection of individuals, properties, causation and crime organization were artificially divided or ignored. It is a typical example of the malpractice of investigation organs (such as avoiding the “real” and efficient investigation activity), that in spite of the confession on fully evolved and concluded bribery involving Dr. József MAGYARI as well and in spite of the recorded accusation, for cc. one and a half year there were actually no investigating steps taken in that regards! The confessing applicant was not examined and never confronted with the suspect. When requesting personal protection, the respond was clear in my case and in the case of a certain witness as well: several threats were proposed if the case to be revealed.

126. By terminating the Criminal Investigation No. 200/2004 investigation procedure, Mr. Ferenc Miklós TÓTH (local appointed personnel of the liquidator manager of the Hunyadi Rt, which latter company was part of the liquidator-organization ordered by Dr. József MAGYARI) and Mr. Zoltán Attila KOVÁCS (CEO of the Duna Libra Rt, an other liquidating company controlled by Mr. József MAGYARI) were charged with official influence peddling and bribery as independently acting member of a business organization.

127. The importance of revealing fully and completely the case No. 200/2004 is not less, then the fact to be proven that the liquidation of the Euro Möbel Line Kft was ordered unlawfully in spring 2003.

128. According to the (Article 27/A of the) Bankruptcy Act of Hungary, no individual may involve in a liquidation procedure, if he or any close relative bears interest in regards of the debtor company. In spite of the explicit prohibition ipso iure, through the participation of two subsidiaries of the Kossuth Holding liquidating company in the liquidation process this rule was violated.

129. Several people are aware of the details of the above roughly drafted and referred cases, nevertheless the authorities somehow lack the sufficient information. Nevertheless the competent authorities have not made much effort to change this situation. This was proven by the attitude of the authorities in Criminal Investigation No. 191/2006, whereas a written detailed proposal for probate were repeatedly ignored, however the result of a precise investigation could have been (it may still) provide sufficient evidences the well-founded nature of the accusation.

130. It was attached a full company-net and a personal-relationship-net of all involved natural and legal persons. Further it was proposed to have the authorities obtained and analyzed the calling list of the suspects.

131. Thought analyzing the call-lists of the involved persons, it could be simply clarified the factual truth, and that their denial is doubtful. Hitherto, the investigating organs ignored this obvious possibility in order to justify whether these people declared false or truth in their testimonials.

132. These evidences would prove undoubtedly the strong and rather peculiar personal relationship between certain individuals, and the absolute absence of the credibility of these people.

133. Further my legal representative (Dr. HAVAS Gábor attorney-at-law) have testified against Mr. József MAGYARI thus made a confession which could be used as a testimony, but no steps were taken, he was never confronted with the alleged suspect (Mr. MAGYARI) – to my best knowledge – there was not even the investigation procedure initiated.

134. Mr. Antal EIGEL has been working as liquidator for more than 12 years and knows Mr. MAGYARI for more than 18 years. He stated explicitly in his detailed incriminating testimony at the Kecskemét City Prosecution Office of Investigation, that Mr. MAGYARI is culpable and involved in crime-organization. In spite of the below statement of Mr. EIGEL the investigation was denied: “in regards of the liquidation Euro Möbel Line Rt. I have to tell you frankly, that I possess various details, but as I am currently working as a liquidator and I own a liquidator company with several employees working on this field. In order to protect the economical interest of myself and my colleges I would not like to share these information with the authorities.” Mr. EIGEL repeated his testimony at the court trial as well.

135. However it seems obvious that Mr. EIGEL and his colleges required witness-protection, the authorities have not realized that need. Nevertheless when Dr. Gábor HAVAS attorney-at-law filed his confession, whereas he unambiguously requested the protection of the police forces. The involved authorities ignored the above as well.

136. The Kecskemét City Prosecution Office of Investigation has not recognized the vulnerability (or never wanted to do so), that in Criminal investigation Case No. 47/2005, the witness to be protected and the suspect from who he supposed to be protected was summoned on the very same day – and by coincidence even met on the corridor of the Office. However they were never confronted until present day.

137. The Kecskemét City Prosecution Office of Investigation was constructed from the former Kecskemét City Prosecution Office, on the basis that the Bács-Kiskun County Police Department may have no competence to investigate as official persons may be involved.

138. According to the testimonies and acquired evidences the former decision of the assistant-head of the Bács-Kiskun County Prosecution Office of the Advocate General, which ceased the investigation on the grounds of lack of evidences should have been set aside and Mr. MAGYARI should be accused and handled as a suspect.

139. Subsequently, Dr. Tímea BERKI, officer of the Central Investigation Office of Prosecution of the Advocate General in the Criminal Investigation No. 396/2003 (against Judge Miklós VARGA), decided on the fall of 2004, that the investigation shall be continued, in reference to Case No. 47/2005 (which case is against a liquidator company, whereas Judge VARGA is closely related to the illegitimate appointment of the liquidator.) At the present time the investigation is in front of the court.

140. I am concerned that the involved prosecution and police officers were intentionally committed fault and carried on their negligent practice, and were engaged in document forgery, aiding of crime and abuse of official power.

141. The disclosure of the relationship-net and interwoven among Kossuth Holding Rt. liquidation group, certain leaders of MFB Rt, companies and further involved interested entities of Mr. Sándor PINTÉR, the Bács-Kiskun County Police Department and unfortunately the Bács-Kiskun County Court is impeded due to the ignorance of the competent investigating authorities.

142. Naturally I have plead in front of the authorities all the relevant details, as I have written previously , that if examining a series of crime which is concluded by a crime-organization, case by case, than the investigation will never reveal the true nature of these crimes.

143. Furthermore, it shall be noted that the confrontation of Mr. MAGYARI – MR. VÁRADI, MR. MAGYARI – Mr. TÓTH, Mr. MAGYARI – Mr.KOVÁCS, Mr.MAGYARI – Mrs. HÖFLE, Mr. MAGYARI – Ms. HAJDÚ ÁGNES, Mr. TÓTH – Mr.KOVÁCS, Mr. TÓTH – Mrs. HÖFLE were not carried out neither, however the reasonable necessity therefore. Certain inconsistency of the relevant cases could be solved.


IV.2. Judicial


144. In the criminal procedure from 29th of May 2007 was lead by Judge Dr. Attila JOÓ, who – probably by mistaken his position – carried out examination of the witnesses. Nevertheless even for him it should have been clear: Mr. TÓTH and Mr. KOVÁCS shall be sentenced. Judge JOÓ has unlawfully refrained to provide the minutes of the trial – including the sections referring to me – however it was requested duly on the ground that it will be needed during an other judicial procedure (in front the same Court of Justice, namely the Csongrád County Court), whereas the same crime-organization is involved in an accusation based procedure (until the date of a trial, as of 5th of July 2007). The explanation for retaining the minutes of the trial was necessary correction to be made. Nevertheless, the document received, contained testimonials as they have never occurred, and further purposely avoided to indicate the opinion of the witnesses with their logical and causational background.
145. The illegitimate practice of retaining was a customary in other procedures as well.

146. Judge JOÓ rejected all and any request of the accusation for seeking for evidence, and has not taken into account that the suspect avoided/was not capable to answer the questions of the accusation in regards of certain practical topics. In spite of the spite of this, the suspect was released from charges on the basis of lack of a committed crime.

147. The suspect has refused the most obviously and precisely in that point to answer whereas the legal representative of the accusing person, requested explanation on a tender, whereas the suspect called for a tender so that the forfeit was not the 10% of the tendered sum, but the sum of each and any offer. Consequently, the liquidator – whose duty was to evaluate the offers professionally, but not including the counter-value of the offers – may calculate the numbers of the undisclosed offers (with notable time before the deadline for the offers to be filed), as the participants should have paid the 10% of their respective offer to the bank account of the company. Thus the suspect – by posing such unlawful situation – breached the principle of secrecy in regards of the conditions of the offers.

148. The suspect pretended not to perceive the meaning of the question, consequently the judge explained the meaning of the question – doing so it was clear that the judge is indeed aware of the fundamental importance of the question in regards of the charges. The decision for the favour of the suspect was particularly surprising thereafter.

149. Furthermore there is an objection undecided in front of the Csongrád County Court, filed for the part of Dr. Tibor EXTERDE (court department leader).

150. There was procedural objection denied by the Csongrád County Court acting as court of appeal. It was indicated the bias of judge Mrs. ILA-TÓTH Dr. Erika Vörös, following which objection was filed, the documents of criminal case No. 1196/2007. As the judge became aware of the actual documents which I was requesting copies of, she ordered not to give out the already copied documents for my part. Further – due to the particular request thereof – I was able to look into the documents, whereas it was found, that documents in regards of two cases were sorted out – nevertheless it was our exact request that this two cases should be handled in two separate procedures. One of these two case are Mr. Zoltán Attila KOVÁCS and others (including accusation documents, notes in regards of the procedure prior to the judicial procedure and the request in regards of the seizure of property.

151. However the documents of the two cases were meticulously separated, the legally independent request for seizure (i.e.: asset-assurance) the Court has not proceed with (effective steps).

152. Later on the application and objection in regards of the irregular handle of the documents was denied on the ground that the judge was not been able to sort out the file. The contradiction is obvious.

153. By mere coincidence, exactly that judge was assigned for my criminal case, who excluded me from inspecting the document of the case so (in a third case whereas I am acting as an aggrieved party), that in spite of the previously requested possibility for the documents to be provided, allegedly took the file to her home. It shall be highlighted that the judge Mrs. ILA-TÓTH has previously orally allowed the copy of the documents. Further it is a matter of course, that any person entitled to revise the documents may acquire copies thereof.

154. In the absence of these documents I was not able to gain that information which is inevitable for the case, which based on my private-accusation to be represented successfully. Should it be the Office of the Advocate General or any Prosecution Office representing the accusation, they may never deny such fundamental rights. As to my understanding the present state constitutes an unfair distinctive practice of the court.

155. In the Case of the liquidation of Hajdu-BÉT Rt., Judge VARGA appointed the liquidator however the transfer of seat of the company was yet not filed, and thus Judge VARGA may have not decide lawfully on the appointment. (Cf. Chapter I.4)

156. In connection with the above it is rather suspicious that the security of the building of the Kecskemét city Procesuction Office and Investigating Office of the Prosecution is furnished by the Árgus Security Kft, which has strong connection to Mr. MAGYARI and Mr. APÁTHY, further (indirectly) to Mr. Sándor PINTÉR.

157. It is unquestionable that there were a series of crimes occurred with particularly high subject value. This fact was so-well known (and that complex) that even an authentic and well-known financial magazine have focused in one of its issue only on the privatization of MBV Rt. It was summarized that a minimum of 1,4 milliard (1.400.000.000) HUF loss was caused to the Hungarian State due to these practices.

158. However the above, the authorities have not initiated further investigation, and the State and governmental authorities deemed everything in order. The Hungarian Financial Supervisory Authority (“PSZÁF”) in the responding letter substituted the criminal investigation against me with the one should be carried out against the individuals involved in the financing and liquidating of the committed crimes (such as Mr. János ERŐS, former leader of the MFB Bank Rt.).

159. I have filed an accusation on 13th of March 2007 (informing the Advocate General on the subject), whereas I have indicated as possible suspects of several type and form of felonies: Dr. László BODÓCZKI , Mrs. BALOGH dr. Kovács Judit , Dr. Ferenc KIRÁLY , further Mrs. PINTÉR Eötvös Ildikó and Éva KARKUS .

160. It is by the present date an unanswered question, for what reason are the judicial trials, investigations without any approach or even the smallest achievement for more than four years. Judge Dr. Miklós VARGA called these corruption cases as “controlled liquidation”. It is suspected that by not setting an exact date for the trial, the procedure can be prolonged so, that eventually the crimes are not to be charged for. I.e. according to the relevant Hungarian regulation, if the investigation is terminated, only in case of new evidences/fact may the investigation continued.

161. If the authorities may not step forward and carry out their lawful duties, than these cases my never been closed, just forgotten. It is due to the bribery involving Judge Dr. Miklós VARGA, that my losses are continuously increasing- including difficulties on financial level and being effected gravely in person as well.

162. In respect of the Investigation No.103/2007 Dr. BODÓCZKI and Mrs. BALOGH with the cooperation of Mr. KIRÁLY carried out a crime abusing their official powers. Whereas Mrs. BALOGH requested certain documents in regards of the investigation against her. This request was refused by the prosecution office, however on the request of Mr. BODÓCZKI (leader of the Court where Mrs. Balogh is working at), the documents were provided by Mr. KIRÁLY.

163. On the 19th of June 2007, I have filed a further accusation at the Central Prosecution Office of Investigation of the Advocate General, against Judge Dr. László BODÓCZKI. According to the designated prosecutor supervising the case – Dr. Tímea BERKI – there was no crime occurred. My complaint on the erratic decision was examined by Dr. László AUER, who commented so: “I had to deny it.” This necessity refers not to the absence of an actual crime…

164. The practice thereafter remained rather simple: the decisions in regards of liquidations (designation of liquidator etc.) was decided by Mrs. BALOGH, any complaints which may occurred was decided by Mr. BODÓCZKI. Thus there was no possibility to cease their unlawful activity.

165. On the 4th of July 2007, I have reported the continuous practice of committing crime in the framework of a crime-organization in regards of such crimes as: fraud of particularly high value, false testifying, abuse of official power, aiding crimes and other criminal acts. On 9th of July 2007, Dr. Zsolt KOPASZ have decided to deny the accusation and at the same time decided upon his own bias (i.e.: the objection and complaint was decided not by a third party independent or superior body, but by the accused himself).

166. In two previously cases, decisions were made in my favour, but only in regards of on procedural grounds. On 17th of July 2007, I have filed an objection against, to which a briefly commented decision on appeal, dated as of 18th of September 2007 was provided. This latter decision have not contained not any reference to actual law regulation. According to the statement of the decision: „the Kecskemét City Prosecution Office have decided in its decision in compliance with legal regulations on the core point of the matter, and verified sufficiently and in harmony with the apparent facts.”

167. The concise decision was made by the spouse (i.e.: Mrs. BALOGH, as indicated above) of Dr. László BALOGH – former representative of the Hungarian Socialist Party – acting as prosecutor is obviously effected by bias. Mainly due to the fact to protect the interest of her own husband, as he acknowledged by his signature that he was aware of, but still ignored the illegitimate acts of the depletion of the premises of the furniture company (and practically of the company itself). Later Mr. BALOGH even furnished with his own acts the above procedure.

168. The bias is verified by the fact, that Dr. Ferenc TÓTH – suspect, liquidator – personally presented for my part Dr. László BALOGH member of the parliament, as “one of his best friend”, just before the elections of 2002.

169. The fact that the complaints in regards of the approach carried out by the prosecution office in connection with the above matter, is proven by the details of the Zuschlag Case , and the comments of the Bács-Kiskun County’s Assistant-Advocate General on the subject.

170. The stable practice and perception of relevant procedural rules are verified in their meaning by the comments of Bács-Kiskun County’s Assistant-Advocate General on the question, how to handle investigation in regards of crime-organizations: he was firm and explicit by expressing his view, i.e. should be there particular personal relationships in a criminal case, the investigation and indicating the suspects shall be extended.

IV.3. Political remedies

171. In addition to the above I have seek the help of several currently elected politicians, from them many promised assistance. Nothing from these promises were ever completed.

172. All of these people assured me from his/her understanding, most of them acknowledged my rights, however considered the forces effecting to the opposite direction and certain interests which they would not like to breach, all of them refrained from all and any initiatives. This lead to the accusation, which was recorded at 17th February 2005, in reference to crimes of privatization; defaults in reporting crime and crimes committed in connection with liquidation.

173. In the followings I have filed a complaint to the Hungarian Socialist Party’s Ethical Committee, addressed directly to Dr. Gábor SIMON, president of the latter. He informed me that the complaint was forwarded to Mr. HILLER, the president of the Party at that time. There was no response.

174. Subsequently, I looked for the assistance of Mr. István ÚJHELYI vice president of the Hungarian Socialist Party. He was surprised, why has Dr. János ERŐS – “our man” he said – impede to a member of the Party. But eventually the vice president have made no palpable effort either.

175. I have written letters to László KOVÁCS , Dr. László BRÚSZEL, Dr. László BALOGH, Mr. Tibor DRASKOVICS further for the part of authorities/organizations such as Hungarian Financial Supervisory Authority (“PSZÁF”), State Audit Office (“ÁSZ”), National Council of Justice (“OIT”), National Association of Liquidators, Governmental Supervisory Office (“KEHI”). By KEHI I was informed that the complaint has been forwarded to the competent person in regards, i.e. the minister of finances – Mr. János VERES. Two years lapsed since that time, but not any procedure started.

IV.4. Miscellaneous

176. Due to the previously mentioned serious facts, I have requested at the Ministry of Finance (which handles the list of lawful liquidators) to cancel the permission of the company to perform liquidation, which has been involved in several crimes during the liquidation, or as a minimum to be excluded from the procedure in my case.

177. The President of Bács-Kiskun County Court and the National Union of the Liquidators were reported duly on the above request. The requested authorities – based on the defence of innocence – suspended the essential investigation and any related procedure until the successful and final termination of the criminal procedure, which has been initiated in 2004. Benefiting this unlawful state, the liquidator company, leaders thereof have continued their contested practice, as well the cover up activity.


178. Further please note that besides such unlawful acts as Mr. PINTÉR acquired a 600 million (600.000.000) HUF value formerly State-owned asset for the value of 80 million (80.000.000) HUF, I have received direct life-threatening (by Mr. Tibor BARTA on 1st May 2006) as well as promises that I will “end up in jail”.

179. In the above regards I have filed a statement on the Kecskemét City Prosecution Office. Complying with the suggestions of the Prosecutors, I have soon were able to record the life-threatening words of Mr. BARTA. It was filed as attachment on a DVD. Such expressions were used: “it is possible that there is a bullet made for you already”; “you know that they are willing to do whatever – you know how are you dealing with” etc. Mr. BARTA was examined on 29th May 2006. He refused the claim. However the obvious contradiction between the testimony and the record, the investigation was terminated.

180. Later I received a call on my cellphone (36/20 582 5774) around the same period of the above threatening. As I could not answer I dialled the number later and it was a local phone from the 96-area code territory. There was no answer, however the answer machine switched on: “You have called the Pintér Families’ voice-mail, please leave a message.” I have tried again, but no one answered. It turned out to my inquiry that the house where the phone rings is registered under the name of Mr. Zsigmond Csüllög .

181. On the fall of 2006 I was followed aggressively by an other car between Taksony and Kunpeszér. Being alone in the car, I have called the central emergency number which was first transferred to the Dabas Police Departure, but they have not answered, later I could reach the Bács-Kiskun County Police Departure, who assisted to find a main road and escape. However all my details were registered, there was no inquiries made from the part of the Bács-Kiskun County Police. As to my best knowledge, all emergency calls are recorded and in case of the suspicion of a offence it shall be investigated.

182. Soon after the above I was asked by three individuals (one introduced himself as Mr. József BERTA) that if I drive my car anyway towards Kecskemét, I could “drop them off” at Taksony at a certain address. Later the purpose of the house at Taksony was not revealed, just slightly implied to (conspiracy – residence for the participants against the present government). The alleged Mr. József BERTA insisted quite passionately to drink a coffee with them, which I had to refuse and leave urgently. I have noticed a police car in front of the house as well (I remember well, that one person in the car was a woman).

183. As soon as I left the village a powerful car started to follow me and in the course of the chase, sometimes I was driving around 200 km/hour in order to escape and survive. I have made reported the situation via phone, but without any plausible effect. As so, I have recorded a testimony at the Budapest V District Police Department. I have indicated as probable suspects Mr. PINTÉR and associates. No investigation was ever carried out.


V. Summary

184. As of the attachments and further references or statements indicated in the present document, in addition all and any correspondence, every material and article on the subject, accusations, reports and testimonials may be filed on request. Please note that at the moment the translation of these documents on our own cost is not viable as the related documents constitute a highly extended amount.

185. The above cases represent a notable but only small slice of the cooperation between allegedly separated powers: private investors, judicature, legislation and investigating bodies. Such persons as Mr. MAGYARI may pose effect on certain judges without any difficulty.

186. The reason why the present system works is that the investigating bodies and jurisdiction instead of preventing the further unlawful activities, became involved with the corruption. In this system certain individuals have particularly important role. Mr. PINTÉR as one of the most influential one of these, represent the rather ambiguous and controversial position as being a very potent businessman, former Minister of Internal Affairs (and thus former head of the criminal investigating organs of Hungary) and through his various positions possess a wide range of very good connections between the State and the private sector.

187. The above is underpinned by the decision No. III/86.282/2004/B of the PSZÁF, whereas a fine was sentenced upon Mr. PINTER due to breach of law via stock-market transaction. In this case the transactions involved insider deal with shares, and were not particularly hidden. In the case of Euro Möbel Line Kft the transactions were rather complex and contained many steps.

188. The Hungarian political elite and financial elite is deemed by the majority of the people unreliable. Further more the priory existing Public-funds Secretary lead by Mr. László KELLER stated in November 2003 the sever and repeated breaches of law, whereas the role of Mr. PINTÉR was unquestionably explained and set out.

189. In regards of the continues unlawful activity of Kossuth Holding Rt the Hungarian Claim Management Rt filed a complaint at the Municipal Court of Budapest at 16th June 2007. Further the above was verified by the letter executed by Mrs. KISS Ágics Ilona, liquidator as of 27th September 2007 .

190. An other case in front of the Municipal Court of Budapest, proves that in case of Kossuth Holding Rt even serious breaches of law may remain without any detrimental legal consequence. The decision was dated as of 1st October 2007 . In this case the mid-term balance was not filed in regards of the liquidation, whereas Kossuth Holding Rt answered the claim simply by assuring that a new mid-term balance will be filed until 15th December 2007. Normally this breach would pose a outstanding fine on the liquidator.

191. Unfortunately the Central Prosecution Office of Investigation of the Advocate General are highly involved in the corruption, including certain leaders thereof. Being so, it is not likely that any effective investigation will be carried out.

192. Should you found the above cases not sufficient to underpin my accusation and the true nature of the above mentioned, I may provide details of many more cases and attach further evidences.


VI. Attachments

1. Company-net

2. Personal relationship-net




Original closed at Kecskemét, 15th October 2007

Borbély József