Эксклюзив: Ева Кайли высказалась о "belgiangate" после нового коррупционного скандала в Брюсселе

euronews (на русском)

Эксклюзив: Ева Кайли высказалась о "belgiangate" после нового коррупционного скандала в Брюсселе  В эксклюзивном интервью Euronews бывшая вице-председатель Европарламента рассказала, как продвигается рассмотрение её дела, в рамках которого её обвинили в коррупции и лишили депутатского иммунитета. Сама Кайли обвиняет власти Бельгии в "инсценировке" и "фальсификациях улик".  ЧИТАТЬ ДАЛЕЕ : http://ru.euronews.com/2025/12/22/kaili-itw-belgiangate  Подписывайтесь: Euronews можно смотреть на Dailymotion на 12 языках

Transcript

00:00It's been three years since the Qatar corruption scandal first rocked the European Parliament.

00:05Explosive allegations and a spectacular police operation.

00:10At the time, Belgian authorities claimed that their countries from Qatar to Morocco

00:14had paid hundreds of thousands of euros to sway and influence decision-making

00:20at the core of European democracy.

00:22The face of the scandal, Eva Kiley, young, glamorous,

00:26and a former vice president of the European Parliament.

00:30Three years later, she tells Euronews she wants to see justice for herself.

00:35The Belgian's prosecutor's office did not respond to a request for comment made by Euronews.

00:40Well, Eva Kiley, thank you so much for joining us on Euronews for this interview.

00:46It's been three years. You say for you it's been three very long years.

00:50And now you want to go public and you want to put it all out in the open

00:54and you say you claim and you want justice, but justice from who?

01:00That's a good question. I think justice should come based on facts.

01:06And now we have enough facts to understand that this was a baseless case.

01:11Optics were used for justice.

01:14And after three years, I think we have now the clarity to see what actually happened.

01:18OK, so what actually happened?

01:21Because, of course, our viewers remember the scandal.

01:25They remember the investigation.

01:28And they remember that Belgian authorities claimed that third countries from Qatar to Morocco

01:32paid cash to influence decision making and to sway you, essentially.

01:38So, again, what actually happened?

01:41And when you say you want to see justice,

01:44is this justice from the Belgian authorities that you're seeking?

01:48So, let's establish the facts.

01:50There were evidence from an investigation of the secret services of Belgium.

01:56And on the wiretops, we can see that there were private funds, not public,

02:01private funds for the president of an NGO, Panseri,

02:06that he used his assistance.

02:08He asked them to help him receive it until he declared it.

02:11This is corroborated by wiretops, by notes, and by testimonies.

02:17Until coercion methods happened and things started to change.

02:21And, of course, that refers to the moment that, well, you went very public

02:28because there was a picture that was printed.

02:31It went viral.

02:32It went global.

02:34There was a piece of luggage.

02:35The Belgian federal police said that that was evidence of cash that was stored in your property

02:42and this luggage was full of cash.

02:45So, we've seen the picture.

02:47Three years later, you say that this is now set up.

02:50So, tell us, then, what was really in that luggage?

02:53Well, we have, again, we have the evidence and the wiretops.

02:57So, it's about facts, not perception, not optics.

03:01These were private funds that we hear on the wiretops that he wanted to receive it for his work.

03:07The photos were staged as illegal, as illegal funds, to create presumption of guilt.

03:14And now we have more evidence that the prosecutor of Belgium pre-orchestrated not just the leaks,

03:22but the story.

03:23So, the target was chosen, the script was pre-written, and the optics replaced the evidence.

03:31Look, that's a very important point, and I want to focus on the idea of the leaks.

03:35Because leaks are, they happen, they are somewhat normal for things to leak in an investigation to the press.

03:43What is different, however, is to leak information to incriminate a person without the full evidence.

03:49So, my question is, where are you framed?

03:54Well, first, we were arrested, accused, punished by detention, based on a hypothesis.

04:01Also, the facts, if the facts matter, were clear that they were not related to corruption.

04:07And now we have the messages between the prosecutor, journalists, and the police,

04:13preparing articles before the investigation even started, deciding the titles,

04:19and then trying to fit everything with twisted leaks on the press,

04:23trying to put coercive methods and intimidation to fit the whole case into the headlines.

04:32This is not leaks, this is pre-orchestration.

04:34It's a narrative that was written instead of evidence.

04:38But if all of this was set up, and you say this was orchestration,

04:42and leaks were put out to incriminate you on purpose,

04:46what was the motivation?

04:48This is a question that many of our viewers wonder, that we still wonder about.

04:54What was the motivation?

04:55Why you in particular?

04:57Well, this is a very good question to ask,

05:00and this would require a trial to get the truth out.

05:03What I can tell you is that there was a public trial,

05:06there was a popularity contest, intimidation.

05:09They used my daughter and other families to change testimonies and make accusations.

05:15Why?

05:15The law is not there.

05:17So the violation of the secrecy and the violation of presumption of innocence

05:21is not to protect the guilty,

05:23is to protect the innocent from public courts and for manipulation by media.

05:29So facts matter, and the justice was reversed in this case.

05:35I can just tell you that today we have a Belgian gate where the judge resigned,

05:40the prosecutor resigned,

05:42the investigator admitted that they were based the case on lies,

05:47so it was lies of coercion,

05:50and the anti-corruption director is now criminally charged.

05:54Again, these were serious allegations,

05:56especially those aimed at the Belgian authorities.

05:57You say this is a Belgian gate.

06:01What does that mean?

06:02What does that mean specifically?

06:04Well, that means that it's not safe for diplomacy or democracy

06:08when based on a hypothesis against the evidence,

06:12people's lives are destroyed,

06:14families are used,

06:16even babies,

06:17and then we have everybody resigning.

06:20We have the fact,

06:20it's not my opinion,

06:22what I'm telling you,

06:23it's based on facts.

06:25So I think when you stage photos,

06:28when you write the script before the case opens,

06:31everybody can understand that being a politician in the European Union,

06:36it seems that you can be targeted by doing your work,

06:41because I was having an official mandate

06:43documented by the president of the parliament

06:46and by Borrell,

06:48the high representative of the commission,

06:50to build bridges with the Gulf countries.

06:52Okay, but I want to go back to the idea of the Belgian gate,

06:55because what you say and what you allude

06:58is that ultimately this is a country

07:02where authorities frame people,

07:06where they plant evidence,

07:07where they use methods

07:08that are borderline on the legality.

07:13Would you say that Belgium is in a way operating like a police state?

07:18Is that what you're saying?

07:20Well, we saw what happened with Mogherini.

07:21He was accused and arrested

07:23before there were evidence.

07:26And now we have a judge,

07:28Anzio,

07:28who opened a criminal case

07:31against the anti-corruption director

07:33and is trying to establish

07:36what actually really happened

07:37against the methods of the Belgians.

07:39This happened in Belgium.

07:40Italy also dismissed the case for corruption

07:44and opened a criminal investigation

07:46against the witness protected by Belgium

07:49for lying.

07:51So I can just talk with facts

07:53and everybody can make like their own conclusions.

07:55I don't need to say what it was,

07:57but I can tell you what are the facts.

07:59And still you say

08:00what happened was three years ago,

08:03the European Parliament,

08:05just to give you an example,

08:06they decided to

08:09make you persona non grata.

08:14You were stripped of your job

08:16as vice president of the European Parliament.

08:18Your immunity also was stripped.

08:22And at the time,

08:24the head of the European Parliament

08:25said that she was going to clean up

08:27the institution

08:28and you became the sort of persona non grata

08:30in the institution.

08:32Have you had any contact

08:33with the head of the European Parliament since?

08:37And what do you make of that reaction?

08:40Of course.

08:40And I asked for a public hearing.

08:43I asked for any hearing

08:44to present the evidence

08:46and it was denied.

08:47I even asked a public court hearing

08:50to present all the facts.

08:53Whoever wants transparency,

08:54if they are honest,

08:55they wouldn't deny a public hearing.

08:57And she denied the public hearing.

08:59The prosecutor denied the public hearing.

09:01Whoever denies

09:02definitely is not an innocent one.

09:04Three years later,

09:05do you feel betrayed

09:06by the president of the parliament,

09:08by Roberta Metzula

09:08and your own colleagues

09:09in the parliament?

09:11Well, I think personally,

09:15I'm expecting justice

09:16to be given

09:19through presenting

09:20all the elements

09:22at court

09:22and to have a fair process.

09:25The process was totally illegal.

09:27So now I'm waiting

09:28to understand

09:28why they use such methods.

09:30But it's not personal for me,

09:32the apology.

09:33It's to the citizens

09:34for losing trust

09:36to the system

09:37because it was presented

09:38as corruption

09:39and we see that in the end

09:41it was private funds

09:43for actually an NGO

09:44that was doing

09:45a good mission

09:46helping people

09:47in Afghanistan,

09:48in Sudan.

09:48So we saw

09:49how you can reverse justice

09:52for political ambition,

09:53for geopolitical games

09:55and people become victims

09:57of this process.

09:59Obviously,

09:59we saw a spectacular rate

10:00when it comes to

10:01Federica Mogherini.

10:03She's a former

10:04representative

10:05for the European Union.

10:07Were you surprised

10:08in any way

10:09to see another round

10:11of arrests like this?

10:13Again,

10:13punished without evidence.

10:16Optics replace justice

10:17and public courts

10:19decide about somebody

10:20if he's innocent or not

10:21before fact,

10:23only with the titles.

10:24So innocence is destroyed

10:26in like a popularity contest

10:27because then

10:28the parliament

10:29and everybody,

10:30they try to side

10:31with whatever is convenient.

10:34So it's easy

10:34to attack the South.

10:35It's easy to attack

10:37South countries,

10:38Arab countries

10:39and create a narrative

10:41and a presumption

10:42that is the opposite

10:44of what the facts

10:45have been saying.

10:47So to me,

10:48it's very worrying

10:49for democracy.

10:50And the reason

10:51I'm speaking out,

10:52even though

10:54it causes trouble

10:55to me

10:55and my family

10:56and even to my case,

10:59it's because

10:59this should not happen

11:00to anyone

11:01and politicians

11:02should not be afraid

11:04to work

11:06on the European institutions.

11:08They should not feel

11:09that the system

11:10can target

11:11and attack anyone.

11:13So I do hope

11:14that this would be

11:15like a lesson

11:16and what happened

11:17to Mogherini recently

11:18or more ready today,

11:20a selective

11:21political prosecution,

11:23this would stop happening

11:24after this case

11:25is over.

11:27Well,

11:27thank you very much

11:28for joining us,

11:30Eva Kaili

11:31and in the end

11:32it will be the facts

11:33and the evidence

11:34that will speak.

11:35This case is still

11:36not set for trial

11:37but there's a question

11:39as to whether

11:39it will make it to trial

11:40but at some point

11:41if it does,

11:42of course,

11:42the justice and the law

11:43is based on facts

11:44and ultimately

11:45it will be the facts

11:46that will speak

11:47for both sides.

11:49Thank you very much.

11:50Thank you, Maria,

11:51so much.

Category

Transcript

Be the first to comment

Recommended