Jan ANTOLIK (aka Karel Sroubek) - 16/09/2019

Parole Hearing

Under section 21(2) of the Parole Act 2002

Jan ANTOLIK (aka Karel Sroubek)

Hearing: 16 September 2019

at Auckland South Corrections Facility via AVL to New Zealand Parole Board, Wellington

Members of the Board:

  • Sir Ron Young – Chairperson
  • Mr L Tawera
  • Mr S Perry


  • Mr P Wicks QC


  • [withheld]

In Attendance:

  • Mr T Graham – NZPB
  • Ms A Smith – RNZ
  • Ms M Nightingale – NZ Herald


  1. Jan Antolik (aka Karel Sroubek) was convicted of importing ecstasy and sentenced to five years and nine months imprisonment.  He has a statutory release date of 5 January 2022.  He has low/medium security classification.  He does have some minor previous convictions.  He has a low RoC*RoI of 0.141.
  2. We last saw Mr Antolik in September 2018.  The Board noted that the index offending involved a large importation worth some $375,000 of MDMA from the Czech Republic.  He had imported the MDMA hidden in orange juice cartons as part of his own legitimate business.
  3. The Board said they considered that the assessment by Serco of a low risk of reoffending had underestimated Mr Antolik’s risk.  They identified a number of factors which they considered were relevant to his risk.  The Board therefore concluded the risk was undue and further delayed consideration of parole for a year.
  4. Today, the updated parole reports do not reassess the previous identified risk.  The reports proceed on the basis that the risk remained low.  No reassessment by Serco was undertaken of the range of factors identified by the Board, which the Board considered increased his risk.
  5. We repeat those factors plus some additional factors, which we consider are highly relevant to an assessment of risk.  Those factors include:

    (a)       The index offending involving an attempted sophisticated importation of drugs into New Zealand from the Czech Republic.
    (b)       The use of false name documentation on New Zealand entry.  We acknowledge Mr Antolik was discharged without conviction with regard to that offending.
    (c)       His association with criminals in the Czech Republic.  Their importation would have required that contact to arrange the importation of the MDMA from the Czech Republic to New Zealand.
    (d)       His association with the Hells Angels in New Zealand.  We acknowledge that Mr Antolik’s criminal trial associated with Hells Angels resulted in an acquittal.  We acknowledge also that Mr Antolik claims that he did not know the men he was involved with then were from Hells Angels.  As the Board said last time, that is difficult to believe.

  6. The other factors we have raised with him today are:

    (a) Mr Antolik reached a settlement with the Crown relating to confiscation of assets and money. That the Crown brought proceedings seeking the confiscation of somewhere over $200,000 which they identified as cash used to pay his mortgage and cash apparently gifted to his in-laws as the proceeds of crime.  A settlement was reached involving confiscation of $160,000. That settlement involved an acceptance by Mr Antolik of criminal offending on a significant scale, the result of which were use of illegal funds to benefit him and his wife.
    (b) Further, the information we have from the Czech Republic shows a series of convictions in the early 2000s, which included violent offending as well as property offending. The convictions resulted in a sentence of four years and six months imprisonment.  That sentence appears to have initially been suspended but was later invoked.  We note Mr Antolik challenged the accuracy of that information the information from the Czech Republic detailed description of the facts which gave rise to the convictions. We have no reason to doubt the information provided by the Czech Republic authorities given the relevant documentation was sealed with the seal of the relevant court.

  7. We acknowledge, as far as Mr Antolik is concerned, that overall he has behaved well within prison.  We also acknowledge that it is hardly his fault or responsibility that he has not had any rehabilitation programmes because Serco have assessed him at low risk of reoffending.
  8. We note that Mr Antolik is a compliant offender although there had been one misconduct in prison that was of a relatively minor matter.
  9. Last time it was suggested that perhaps he could undertake some release to work and other reintegration but because of his deportation status he was not eligible for release to work.  He has been in self-care now for a period of time.
  10. Our view however, as we have said is that Serco have seriously underestimated Mr Antolik’s risk.  We do not think it is low at all.  Given the matters we have identified above, we think it is significantly higher than low.  We think there is evidence to support the fact that Mr Antolik has a significant history of illegal activity in both the Czech Republic and New Zealand and spread over many years.  Not all of the offending is illustrated by formal convictions.  Some of the offending is violent, some drugs and some dishonesty.  Given that intensive past history we think he remains an undue risk.  We do not consider any of the proposed special conditions significantly affect that risk.  Parole is therefore declined.
  11. The way forward now for Mr Antolik is as follows.  We will delay further consideration of parole for a relatively short period until the end of January 2020.  During that time, based on the information contained in this decision, we invite Serco to re-assess Mr Antolik’s risk, identify whether there is an increase in his risk and if so, whether he qualifies for any risk-based rehabilitation.  That assessment should be undertaken by a psychologist.  The Board will then be in a position in January to identify the way forward for Mr Antolik.  We acknowledge, in the meantime, that he appears to have possible employment and appropriate accommodation in the community. As we have said, given our assessment, he remains an undue risk to the community.  We will see him again by the end of January 2020.

Sir Ron Young