The original documentation on the basis of which certain officials received loans larger than requested, as well as how those who were not entitled to them received the money, was in the possession of the Special State Prosecutor's Office (SDT), but today no one knows where it is. Mainly due to the lack of these originals, the High Court in Podgorica acquitted DPS and SD officials of charges that they abused their official position.
SDT announces an appeal and claims that they returned the documentation to the Government four years ago. In March 2021, the SDT returned the original documentation on the allocation of apartments and loans for the period 2016-2020 to the Housing Commission. They also returned the complete files on the work of the Commission - information, minutes, conclusions, decisions. Previously, as the SDT claims, they extracted and copied two binders from the documents in which, in their opinion, there was evidence that certain officials were allocated larger amounts than requested, but also that loans were approved to persons who did not meet the criteria, because they did not perform tasks of particular importance to the state.
This emerges from the SDT files, which is why they announced an appeal against the first-instance verdict of the Higher Court issued at the end of last week.
The then president of the Commission was held liable for abuse of official position. Predrag Boskovic and members Budimir Apprentice, Suad Numanović, Sanja Vlahovic, Ivan Brajović, Damir Sehovic, Dragica Sekulić, Osman Nurkovic, Suzana Pribilović, Drazen Milickovic, Jelena Radonjic i Aleksandar Jovićević.
Explaining the acquittal, the president of the special chamber, judge Vesna Kovačević, she pointed out that key documents attached to the SDT indictment were submitted as copies of copies, without any certification.
The court ruled that such documents cannot have probative value, because it is not possible to confirm their authenticity and integrity, which is in contradiction with Article 355 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
After the verdict is pronounced, the prosecution representative, the special prosecutor Vukas Radonjic, announced an appeal, emphasizing to reporters that he considers the verdict completely illegal and irregular.
"As for the copies of copies themselves, as the court says, it is a copy of the original... It is legally valid evidence," said Radonjić, adding that the court's actions "violate the right to the truth."
Where are the originals?
During the court proceedings, and in the reasoning of the verdict, it was heard that the special prosecutors tried to obtain original documentation from the Government, the State Archives, and the Property Administration, but also that the Court tried to obtain it from the General Secretariat of the Government and that they received information that there were no original documentation.
It is unclear, however, where the documentation that the SDT, headed at the time, disappeared to. Milivoje Katnic, returned to the Government Commission on March 15, 2021.
Special Prosecutor Radonjić previously, in his closing arguments, highlighted several examples that, in the opinion of the SDT, confirm the allegations of the prosecution - that certain officials received more money than the amount they requested, that some officials were given money to improve their housing conditions, even though they requested it for something else, that a waiter at the Property Administration received assistance for "performing work of particular importance to the state"...
Among others, he highlighted the example of the former director of the Tax Administration Miomir M. Mugoša, who requested funds to legalize his house, and received a loan to improve his housing conditions, but also a former public official Ibrahim Smailović, who did not specify the amount of the loan he was requesting, and was approved for 40.000 euros.
He also highlighted examples of officials who asked for 30.000 euros each and received 40.000 euros each...
Radonjić said that, as the case handler, it never occurred to him to hide the fact of the non-existence of original documents from any participant in the proceedings.
"On the contrary, due to my professional attitude towards the job and the case, I personally searched for them in the manner prescribed by law - at the Government of Montenegro, the State Archives, the Property Administration, but without success. But what I can say is that in the criminal case Ktr-S 216/19, its investigator, the then SDT Tatjana Žižić, requested from the Commission for Housing Affairs of the Government of Montenegro, headed by the accused Bošković at the time, all documentation on the work of the Commission in terms of granting not only loans, but also apartments, for the period specified in the indictment. That documentation was then submitted to the SDT by the Commission and the accused Bošković on several occasions with the act of 3 February 2020, number 07-004-355 and the act of 13 February 2020, number 07-004-355/2, and in the files there is also an act of the then Chief Special Prosecutor Ktr-S 216/19 dated 15 March 2021, which states: 'After the inspection, we are returning to you the documentation that you provided us with your acts'. "By examining that file, which does not consist only of the cover, the files in the cover, but also of two binders that were submitted to the court with the indictment, I determined that those binders contained the documentation on the work of the Commission - decisions, information, minutes, requests, conclusions of the Government, in photocopies," said Radonjić in his closing remarks.
Emphasizing that he believed that the case processor had reviewed the documentation provided to him by the Commission in February 2020, he copied and returned it in March 2021:
"Because there is no other explanation for how this documentation is an integral part of the prosecution's file Ktr-S 216/19."
He also raised the issue of the fact that the original documentation for the period covered by the indictment is not available from those state bodies that should possess it.
"My professional position is that the copies in the court files can be used as evidence on an equal footing, as if they were the originals. I base this position on the fact that the objections, even from the expert defense of the accused, do not concern the content of the copies of the documents, but only the fact that they are only copies, and that no participant in this proceeding, nor the Montenegrin public, has been informed in any way that a public official or employee, for whom the Commission's decision is made, did not receive a loan, or that he did not receive the amount specified in the decision, so that everything contained in the photocopies of the documents is..."
Bonus video:
