The state of Montenegro will have to pay 2.100 euros to one of the leaders of the Buducnost fans, Aleksandar Čako Ivanović, because he was brutally beaten by police during the 2019 football derby between Sutjeska and Buducnost in Nikšić.
This is the ruling of the Basic Court in Podgorica, which partially accepted Ivanovic's lawsuit against the Ministry of Internal Affairs.
The court, however, assessed that Ivanovic bears 30 percent responsibility for the serious injuries he sustained, or for "the occurrence of the harmful event", referring to the fact that he had previously been convicted by a final and binding verdict for attacking two police officers after the match.
His legal representative, attorney Srđan Lješković, has already appealed the court's decision, as he believes the court made a mistake when it rejected part of the request that requested an additional 1.900 euros.
Ivanovic was seriously injured on April 3, 2019, and medical doctors during the trial in which he was accused of attacking police officers stated that these were serious physical injuries and that the injury to the central parietal part of the head "abstractly could have been a possibility of losing life or a possible source of infection, because it is a highly vascularized area."
"To this day, the prosecution has never attempted to determine who the persons who caused Ivanovic serious bodily harm were. In the end, they are claiming that he allegedly caused the incident," Lješković told Vijesti, adding that six years ago, at the time of the incident, "the police in Montenegro were maximally protected."
During the proceedings against the Ministry of Internal Affairs, conducted before the Podgorica court, it was determined that the police officers that day inflicted physical and psychological injuries on Ivanovic, as well as violating his right to dignity, honor and reputation.
Based on this, he was awarded compensation for non-pecuniary damage - 840 euros for violation of physical integrity, 420 euros for violation of psychological integrity, 840 euros for violation of honor, reputation and dignity, according to Lješković's appeal against the decision made on June 9.
Commenting on the verdict, Lješković told Vijesti that the Ministry of Interior sued because Ivanovic suffered serious, life-threatening injuries, which, he says, was confirmed by medical expert Dr. Miodrag Šoć.
"Case law is not uniform, and until case law is uniform, we will have a standstill in the work of the courts and the making of decisions like the one made for the leader of the Barbarian fans," said the lawyer.
Complaint
The appeal he filed states that the first-instance verdict contains significant violations of the provisions of civil procedure, that the factual situation was incorrectly determined, and that substantive law was incorrectly applied.
He states that it cannot be concluded from the contested judgment on the basis of which the court decided on the violation of the plaintiff's personal rights, especially considering that the court did not explain the criteria it used when deciding on the amount of compensation for damages due to the violation of the right to physical integrity.
"On page 20 of the contested verdict, the court concludes that the described conduct of the police officers violated the plaintiff's rights to physical (bodily) and psychological (mental) integrity, which was determined from the findings of a medical expert, and that the court found that the basis for the plaintiff's claim was proven, and that the actions of the police officers in the specific case - which contained elements of inhuman and degrading treatment, resulted in a violation of the plaintiff's personal rights, namely a violation of physical and psychological integrity, and consequently a violation of the plaintiff's dignity, honor and reputation. From this court's conclusion, it is not clear what the plaintiff's contribution to the occurrence of the harmful consequences is, and what contribution the court determined in the specific case to be 30 percent," the appeal states.
“It hurts less when he is convicted”
The lawyer adds that it can be concluded from the contested verdict that the court bases the percentage of the plaintiff's contribution to the occurrence of the harmful event on the fact that Ivanovic was convicted in criminal proceedings, which, he states, has no bearing on the specific legal matter:
“Because the plaintiff did not cause injuries to the defendant’s officers, but the defendant’s officers caused injuries to the plaintiff. This is all the more so since on page 18 of the contested judgment it is stated that the video footage ‘shows that the plaintiff steps out in front of the bus, holds his head, and then at one point is surrounded by about ten police officers who use means of coercion against him, namely batons and physical force, and that they continue to use them even though the plaintiff was knocked to the ground, i.e. did not resist’. Therefore, although it could be unequivocally concluded from the evidence presented that about ten defendant’s officers used physical force against the plaintiff, and that he did not resist, it is not clear what contribution the plaintiff could have made to the occurrence of the harmful consequences. The plaintiff believes that, even if he had wanted to, he could not have made any contribution to the occurrence of the harmful consequences. Furthermore, the plaintiff believes that his failure to comply with the police order not to enter the field among the players and to move away was the subject of the criminal proceedings in which he was found guilty and sentenced, and that "The defendant's officers used this very event in this particular case to 'punish' the plaintiff, even though they had filed a criminal complaint against him," the complaint states...
Bonus video:
