In response to the lawsuit, the Government of Montenegro confirmed my allegations - that the sole purpose of my illegal return to the criminal record is the explanation that I was previously convicted, which represents a scandal and legal nonsense, especially in light of the fact that the legal consequences of the conviction have long since ceased, he told Vijesti yesterday. the dismissed Inspector General of the National Security Agency Artan Kurti.
He thus commented on the response to the complaint submitted to the Administrative Court, which is signed by the Secretary General on behalf of the Government Dragoljub Nikolic.
In the answer submitted to the judge Ljiljani Šoškić writes that the Government acted in all respects with respect to positive legal regulations and, in accordance with the Law on the National Security Agency, issued a Decision on the dismissal of the Inspector General.
They referred to the competence of the Government to appoint and dismiss the inspector general, to the conditions which subsequently stipulated that the inspector general must have "at least five years of work experience in the security sector"...
"By examining the business biography of Artan Kurti, which is in the archives of the General Secretariat, and which he submitted for the purposes of the appointment proposal from July 18, 2022, it can be unequivocally concluded that he does not meet the requirements for appointment, and that he does not he has the necessary work experience to perform the duties of the Agency's inspector general," the answer reads.
The Government points out that Kurti's claims that the Decision by which he was dismissed are confusing and that there is no reason for decisive facts do not stand:
"Given that the Decision clearly and precisely explained the reason for his dismissal from the position of Inspector General of the National Security Agency. We consider it important to mention the fact that the Cabinet of the Prime Minister, due to the importance of this issue, turned to the Ministry of Justice in order to provide information on whether Artan Kurti is in the criminal record, and we were provided with an extract from the criminal record from the relevant ministry. the fact that the prosecutor does not meet the conditions stipulated by Article 40 paragraph 2 of the Law on National Security, he also does not meet the conditions prescribed by Article 27a paragraph 1 of the same Law"...
They also answered that the Government did not violate the Constitution in any way:
"Furthermore, the dismissed General Inspector Artan Kurti was appointed by the 43rd Government and adopted his work report. Given that the mandate of the 43rd Government ended on October 31, 2023, analyzing the seriousness of performing the work tasks of the Inspector General prescribed by the Law on the National Security Agency, and the importance of the Government's trust in its work, as previously stated, that is, that it does not fulfill legal conditions for performing the duties of the Inspector General of the National Security Agency, in accordance with Article 49 paragraph 2 of the Law on National Security, 44. The Government did not give faith to the success of the work and the performance of the tasks of the Inspector General Artan Kurti, and in accordance with the right provided for by law, a decision was made on his dismissal ", he writes in the response to the lawsuit filed by Kurti.
They urged the court to reject Kurti's lawsuit as unfounded.
On November 9, 2023, the government dismissed Kurti from the post of ANB inspector general, after which he filed a lawsuit in the Administrative Court because he believes that the executive branch did it in an illegal way.
The Administrative Court overturned the Government's decision when Kurti was relieved of his duties as inspector general in the ANB and sent the case back to the Government for retrial.
After that, the Government again issued a decision on the dismissal of Kurti, justifying that they have the "discretionary right to appoint and dismiss the inspector general who is responsible for their work"...
After that, Kurti submitted a new lawsuit, as well as a criminal complaint against the prime minister Milojko Spajić, in which he claims that the Prime Minister abused his official position when he dismissed him for the second time.
He did this on April 24, six days after the Government dismissed him again, despite the decision of the Administrative Court, and the day after that the Ministry of Justice tried again to return the man from Ulcinj to the criminal record. They managed to do that a few days later, because they annulled the decision from June 2020, when it was from the criminal record.
Legal nonsense and breaking the law
Emphasizing that the Government has confirmed his allegations, whose sole goal is to return him to the criminal record, Kurti assessed that this represents a scandal and legal nonsense.
"Especially with the fact that the legal consequences of a conviction have long since ceased, while Article 60 of the Law on Civil Servants states that the reason for dismissal is if the conviction occurred during the performance of the function, and for an act that makes one unworthy, and not before that. the sooner if the legal consequences, which last up to 10 years at most, have ceased, according to Article 117 paragraph 3 of the Criminal Code of Montenegro", said Kurti.
He pointed out that it is scandalous for the Ministry of Justice to provide the Government with information on convictions, "because they were not authorized to do so according to Article 123, paragraph 3 and 4 of the Criminal Code of Montenegro".
"All the more, the intention is very clear, bearing in mind that they requested the data from the Prime Minister's Office, so I will contact the Agency for the Protection of Personal Data. After all, in the decision on dismissal there is not a single sentence about conviction, but only in the response to the lawsuit, the Government illegally states this fact, which shows how much they know, by retroactively applying the Law on ANB, up to non-compliance with the reasons from the previous ruling of the Administrative Court".
Bonus video:
