The Belgian MEP had been detained as part of the investigation into corruption in the European Parliament following his interrogation by the investigating judge, and last Thursday, the Brussels chambers decided to extend his custody. Even before this hearing of the chambers, Tarabella’s lawyer, Maître Maxim Töller, had filed a request for recusal once morest the examining magistrate Claise.
According to Tarabella’s attorney, Claise trampled on the presumption of innocence in his arrest warrant. Indeed, this arrest warrant states: “The accused’s public positions were initially detrimental to Qatar, but were adjusted once suspicious money movements were detected. »
According to Mr. Töller, the investigating judge so clearly indicated his point of view on Tarabella’s guilt.
“He seems to take as proven the incriminating facts on which he is investigating,” he echoed last week. “The problem lies in the way the arrest warrant is worded. There is no use of the wise conditional. It is not possible that in the first pleading drawn up once morest Mr. Tarabella, we start from the principle that he is guilty, that he accepted money. We dispute all that he is accused of”.
The investigating judge Claise, however, refused to recuse himself from the case, now leaving it to the court of appeal to rule on the dispute. An appeal in cassation is still possible once morest the decision of the Court of Appeal.