The Supreme Court of Montenegro has issued a judgment approving the request for protection of legality filed by the Supreme State Prosecutor's Office of Montenegro (SPO) against the final judgments of the Higher Court in Podgorica from July 2024 and the Court of Appeal of Montenegro from February 2025, in the criminal case against the defendant Miomir Mugoša, former Mayor of the Capital City of Podgorica, for the criminal offense of abuse of official position.
The Supreme Court found that the lower-instance verdicts were rendered in violation of the law in favor of the defendant, because the lower-instance courts' reasons on the decisive facts were unclear, contradictory and based on an incorrect legal basis, and therefore contained significant violations of the provisions of criminal procedure.
The request of the Supreme State Prosecutor's Office indicated that the Higher and Appellate Courts misinterpreted the then-current regulations relating to the transfer of rights to city construction land, since at the time when Mugoša, as mayor, made decisions on the transfer of land to the "Carine" company (in 2007 and 2011), there was no legal possibility of transferring land by direct agreement, but exclusively through public bidding.
"The subject of the proceedings related to the transfer of rights to city construction land with a total area of approximately 15 thousand square meters, in the cadastral municipality of Podgorica III, which the defendant, as the mayor of the Capital City, transferred to the company "Carine". The land was paid for at a price of 165 euros per square meter, or for a total compensation of 2.508.285 euros. According to the Supreme Court's assessment, the actual market value of the land, depending on the plots, was from 384,88 to 857,02 euros per square meter. In this way, as the Supreme Court concluded, the company "Carine" obtained a material benefit of 6.723.194,85 euros, while the Capital City of Podgorica suffered damage in the same amount," the Supreme Court's statement reads.
The Supreme Court found that the then-current Law on Construction Land and the 2003 Decree of the Government of Montenegro clearly prescribed the obligation to conduct a public tender, and that only cases where land was transferred for the needs of state bodies or for expropriated land were exempted from that procedure. The possibility of transfer by direct agreement was introduced only by the 2009 Law on State Property, which was not in force at the time of the acts with which Mugoš was charged.
"The court finds that the lower courts are losing sight of the fact that the defendant was charged with abusing his official position as mayor and exceeding the limits of his official powers, because he did not have the legal right to independently make decisions on the transfer of rights to the plots in question, since such jurisdiction belonged exclusively to the Assembly of the capital city of Podgorica, and that, in this specific case, in accordance with the then applicable regulations, there was no legal possibility of transferring land by direct agreement, but exclusively through public bidding," it was announced.
The Supreme Court found that the lower courts had incorrectly assessed the existence of Mugoša's intent, because they assessed his actions based on regulations that were not in force at the relevant time, and ignored the fact that he was charged with acting contrary to applicable regulations, persisting in this even after the Supreme Court of Montenegro, acting on review, determined in its judgment of December 2010 that the contracts on the transfer of rights to city construction land, which the Capital City of Podgorica concluded with the company "Carine" in 2007, were null and void, because they were concluded by direct agreement contrary to the legally prescribed public bidding procedure, and that the contracting parties were obliged to return the land and the benefits received.
The Supreme Court concluded that the lower courts, by giving illogical and contradictory reasons about the existence of intent, violated the provisions of criminal procedure and misapplied the law.
"The aim of this extraordinary legal remedy is to ensure the control of the legality of final decisions and the uniform application of the law in the work of courts, in situations where this has not been achieved through regular legal remedies. Starting from the principles of the rule of law, legal certainty and equality of citizens before the law, as fundamental values, the Supreme Court emphasizes that its role is to ensure lawful and uniform judicial practice in the legal order of Montenegro, which it does with this decision. Taking into account the fact that the request for protection of legality was filed to the detriment of the defendant, the Supreme Court, finding that the request was well-founded, determined that there was a violation of the law, but did not touch the final decision," the Supreme Court said in a statement.
Bonus video:
