H.M. contact letter The Metropolitan Penal Enforcement Institution 40-30/984/2010 dr. Katalin Kutron for the chief prosecutorial team leader prosecutor Csaba Boglyasovszky PE. Brigadier-General, Principal Administrator Commander of Institution Respo

                                                                                                                                                              #7082 P.001.

Metropolitan Penal-enforcement Institution

I. objektum: 1055 Budapest Nagy Ignác u. 5-11.         Tel: 475 5500     Fax: 302-4008

II. objektum: 1027 Budapest Gyorskocsi u. 25-27.    Tel.:488 5010    Fax: 201-8070

III. objektum: 1108 Budapest Maglódi út, 24.         Tel.: 432 2602    Fax. 262-2503

web: www.bvfo.t-online.hu                 e.mail: bvfo@t-online.hu


40 -30/984/2010.                                                                          To be forwarded by fax: on number 354-2850!


                                                                                                    Subject: Miklós Hagyó's contact

                                                                                                    Reference No. Inv. 477/2010.

                                                                                                    Admin:                                   PE. first lieutenant

Dr. Katalin Kutron                                                         Tel.:   475- 5516

Chief prosecutorial team leader


Central Investigating Chief Prosecutor's Office




Honourable Prosecutor, 


On the 20th of October 2010 in response to requests received by fax in connection with the contacting of Miklós Hagyó (born:                                                           ) I inform you about the following.

  • The 6/1996. (VII.12.) MJ regulation basis of 19/A. § the detainees are sending out to the relatives or to other persons designated by them the standard form called "Declaration" in order to that the contacts could come into existence. This had also happened in the case of the named detainee: II.V. signed the declaration of consent on the 17th of May 2010, based on which she wishes to keep contact with the inmates as his unmarried partner. 

Since the 4th point of the decree dated on the 17th of May 2010 "the control of the previously arrested correspondence and verbal contact with visitors has been entrusted to the PE. Institution", - having regard to the CP. 43.§ (3) paragraph b) point - the preceptor handled II.V. as the contact person in the title of the unmarried partner.


To record II.V. as a legal representative at our institution took place in the following manner. 

Named on the 17th of August 2010. requested from the institute, that Wirtass Trade and Service Limited Liability Company business matters related to the representation in order to achieve could come into contact with Hagyó inmate 2 times a month. For her request attached was an authorization registered as received by the prosecutor, as well as a notarial certificate for the existence of the consensual partnership. To submit the request and authorization empowered Szűcs and Partners Law Firm. The request and its annexes (by the law firm) arrived on the 25/08/2010 by post to the Metropolitan Penal-Enforcement Institution, following which on one hand by the commander of the institute was authorized the contact for the day of 26/08/2010, and on the other hand II.V. was recorded in the inmate subsystem as the legal representative.

II.V. in 2010. 31st of August has submitted another request, in which before the Municipal Court under case number: 19.P25425/2010. in a pending case collation requested to abreast of connection with the detainee. Her application was received at our institute on the 2nd of September 2010. The relevant authorization was handed over personally to the preceptor by detainee, who has forwarded to the Department for Registration. The authorization was taken over by the Department of Registration on the 23rd of September 2010. The commander of the institute on the basis of the application allowed the visit on the 6th and 17th of September 2010.

  • I inform you that besides II. V. , among his correspondents only his father, his child, his former spouse as well as specified attorneys are listed. In respect of other persons than the lawyers and II.V. authorization cannot be located in the records. 
  • I attach a copy of a computer printout lists from the register, which recorded the named contact persons as well as the visits that were made. Furthermore I attach 3 pieces of preceptorial records, which are also recorded the visits that were made​​. It can be seen from the datas of the register, that at Hagyó detainee - besides the lawyers - within a serial interlocutor his ex-wife visited him 1 time, II.V. 5 times (26/05/2010; 18/06/2010; 20/07/2010; 18/08/2010; 24/09/2010) in survivors' quality, and 5 times as the legal representative (26/08/2010; 02/09/2010; 06/09/2010; 10/09/2010; 07/10/2010; 19/10/2010)


I inform you that the III. object of the Metropolitan Penal-Enforcement Institution visits are conducted - in the case of legal representatives - happens in speaking booths. In the booths the prisoner and the visitor are separated by a transparent plastic item, they can talk to each other over the phone. The occasion of speaking outside the booth in the foreground there is 1 staff of the penal-enforcement department, and 1 staff of the security department, however the conversation can be checked through the device (listening in). Control statements are not made​​.


To the authorization of the visits of II.V. as legal representative was made pursuant to the 44/2007. (IX.19.) DOJ regulation. The Regulation 1.§ (2) paragraph g) point within the meaning of the PE. body territory may enter the detainee's not acting as pleader legal representative, as well as other representatives acting under authorization (hereinafter referred to as detainee representative). 

Within the meaning of the 10. § "the representative of the detainee to enter the territory of the PE. body, to its control and stay, shall apply the 6.§ (1) and (3) provisions of paragraph with the exception, that the representative can visit detainee in an agreed date with the Head of the PE. body. Entry should be permitted if the representative of detainee  visit the institute in order to get the authorization signed by detainee. The representative of detainee until the signed authorization only can talk to detainee under supervision”.


Budapest, 21st of October 2010.                                                 Sincerely  

                                                                                                      Csaba Boglyasovszky PE. Brigadier-General, 

                                                                                           Principal Administrator Commander of Institution