Court rejects appeals: Aco Đukanović remains in custody

The Criminal Chamber of the Basic Court in Nikšić rejected the appeals of Aco Đukanović's defense lawyers and confirmed the decision ordering detention on suspicion of illegal possession and carrying of weapons and explosives.

The Council of the Basic Court in Nikšić rejected as unfounded the appeals filed by Aco Đukanović's defense lawyers against the decision of the investigating judge ordering his detention.

Djukanovic was remanded in custody on reasonable suspicion that he committed the criminal offense of illegal possession and carrying of weapons and explosives. According to the court's decision, the detention was ordered on the grounds of the risk of flight.

The court assessed that there is a reasonable suspicion that Đukanović committed a criminal offense, which, they state, stems from evidence collected during the search of his house in the Rastoci settlement near Nikšić.

"Namely, the reasonable suspicion that the defendant committed the criminal offense charged against him by the order for the conduct of the investigation of the Basic State Prosecutor's Office in Nikšić, Kti.br. 2/26 dated 28.02.2026, arises primarily from the record of the search of the apartment and other premises of the Police Administration of Montenegro - Sector for Combating Crime, no. 29/9-215/26-11409 dated 27.02.2026, with regard to the findings that during the search of the defendant's residential premises in the Rastoci settlement, the following were found: a hunting carbine, caliber 7,9mm - M - 48, serial no. A-15167, with a dedication on the lid: "To President M. Đ. from the MNO RCG Podgorica, July 13, 1992", with an optical sight, brand “Mauser” 6x42 black with a holster and cleaning kit, without a license plate (found in the bedroom on the closet); a pistol brand “CZ 99 PARA”, caliber 9 mm, fab. no. 17037 with a frame of 5 bullets, of unknown caliber, located in a white box with a spare frame without bullets with a license plate in the name of Đ. R., issued on September 21, 1993 by CB Podgorica, with a validity period of 10 years; a cardboard package with 405 pieces of ammunition of unknown brand and caliber with 3 empty frames; a small-caliber rifle brand “Ruger”, caliber 22 LR, serial no. 115-21296, with an optical sight brand “Busmnell”, 3x 7x custom 22; a rifle shotgun of unknown brand with the inscription “Made in Brasil”, caliber 12, factory no. 22267, without a license plate; PVC case; pistol of unknown brand, silver color with a colorless handle, with a numerical marking on the metal part, without a license plate; cartridge of unknown caliber; hunting knife about 40 cm long, brown handle, with the inscription “Barac”, hunting carbine, brand “M48” of unknown caliber, factory no. K-31784, with a handmade stock without a license plate; bullets – 2 pieces, unknown brand and caliber; 2 protective vests – white bulletproof vests, with the inscription “Point blank”; 2 protective vests – bulletproof vests, with the inscription “Point blank”, black protective vest-bulletproof vest of unknown brand, with the inscription “Protection Class III A” and black binoculars, brand “Zeiss”. The above-mentioned items were temporarily seized from the defendant, as follows from the certificate of "temporarily seized items of the Police Directorate - Crime Prevention Sector No. 29/9-215/26-11409/2 of 28.02.2026. ", the explanation of the panel of the Basic Court in Nikšić reads.

The reasoning for the decision states that the circumstances of the case indicate a real risk of flight if the defendant were to defend himself from freedom.

The court appreciated the fact that Đukanović had previously stayed abroad several times, including stays longer than three months, and that he had significant financial resources.

"The data in the files show that the defendant's last stay abroad lasted 103 days continuously, which represents a period longer than three months. Such a duration of stay cannot be considered a short-term trip, but rather indicates the ability to organize life outside the territory of the state for a longer period of time, as well as the existence of a certain degree of personal and social contacts abroad. In this sense, the frequency and length of stays represent an objective indicator of the defendant's degree of mobility and international connections. Therefore, the panel finds that the defendant's financial power, observed in connection with his previous pattern of movement and stay abroad, does not represent a hypothetical or abstract circumstance, but a concrete factor that influences the assessment of the risk of his inaccessibility to the court if he were to be released," the panel of the Basic Court in Nikšić states in its reasoning.

The court assessed that the purpose of ensuring the defendant's presence in the proceedings could not be achieved by milder measures, such as confiscation of passports or other surveillance measures.

Therefore, it was decided to reject the defense attorneys' appeals and confirm the detention order, while no appeal is allowed against this decision.