On Monday, the Bratislava regional court ruled that police officers Ján Čurilla and Pavol Ďurka would not be remanded in custody, siding with the judge's earlier observation that the prosecutor had not filed the request for their detention correctly. Justice Minister Boris Susko commented that the prosecutor had undermined the efforts of the police inspection. This outcome represents a significant defeat for the political party Smer, which had previously portrayed the case as a major operation against the police involved.

Commentator Marek Vagovič noted the irony that Deputy Speaker of Parliament Tibor Gašpar, who is implicated in the case as a victim, spoke out in favor of detaining the officers, suggesting this constitutes a conflict of interest and an attempt to influence the judiciary. He characterized the accusations against the police as filled with conjecture and difficult to verify, indicating that the situation remains fluid and further developments are anticipated. The notion that the failure of the operation might be blamed on Prosecutor Žeňuch and indirectly on Maroš Žilinka illustrates the complex interplay between law enforcement, politics, and judicial processes in Slovakia.

Martin Hanus reminded the audience that this case has seen previous judicial involvement by Judge Tomáš Hajduk from the city court, emphasizing the longstanding nature of these proceedings. This ongoing legal saga reflects broader issues within the Slovak political and judicial system, particularly how political motivations can complicate the administration of justice and the public's trust in legal frameworks. As this story unfolds, it could have lasting implications for both the involved parties and the Slovak justice system as a whole.