Bencun: Tender was not rigged for Statis

The CEO of Adriatic Properties reacted to the article "Milo set up Statisa Svec before the tender" Goran Bencun. We transmit the response in full:

“On the front page of your printed edition for May 6, 5, a text was published under the title 'Milo framed Statisa Sveca before the tender', in which, in addition to the title that absolutely does not correspond to the truth or even the content of the text that was published, there was also more incorrect information.

Namely, the headline states 'Milo set up Statisa Svec before the tender', which leads to the conclusion that Petros Stathis sa Milo Đukanović negotiated the lease of Sveti Stefan before the tender for the lease was announced and the readers are forced to conclude that there was potential corruption. The text mentions alleged communications between representatives of Amman and representatives of the state from 2004 and 2005. In this alleged communication, Mr. Petros Stathis is not involved or mentioned in any way, so it is not clear how the journalist and editor then formed the headline that Stathis was offered the Svetac before the tender. This is completely incorrect information and there is not a single trace of it in any document or testimony of anyone for a very simple reason - because Petros Stathis at that time (2004/05/06 until 2009) was not in any way involved in the lease of Sveti Stefan.

He, then as a minority partner together with the majority partner Mr. Restis, entered into the already concluded lease agreement for Sveti Stefan only in 2009. as the second investor (lessee) of Sveti Stefan. The initial lease agreement for Sveti Stefan was concluded in January 2007 by a Singapore company (represented by the then owner of Aman, Mr. Adriana Zech-e) which was the first investor and lessee of Sveti Stefan. That company participated in the tender, negotiated the content of the contract, concluded a long-term lease agreement for Sveti Stefan and Miločer and then managed Sveti Stefan for almost three years under that agreement until they were forced to withdraw from the agreement because they could not continue the implementation of the planned investment due to the consequences of the great economic crisis that began in 2008. Only after that, in 2009, did Mr. Statis enter into the already concluded agreement without affecting the content and obligations thereof.

The text further states 'In the document that 'Vijesti' had access to, representatives of 'Aman' write that Petros Stathis will contact Đukanović to discuss the situation'. However, this is not stated anywhere in the document that the journalist is referring to as having had access to. In the document (internal email correspondence within the Aman group) written by the director of Aman Sveti Stefan (Sven Van Den Broeck) Director of Amman Global Operations (Ferdinand Wortelboer) it is said that as he (Sven van Den Broeck) understands, Petros Stathis will contact 'Mr. D' (meaning Mr. Doronjin, Vladislav Doronin owner of Aman) to consider the situation. The journalist further quotes this document, but selectively, skipping the first following sentence which unambiguously reveals who the director of Aman Sveti Stefan means by 'Mr. D' or at least clearly indicates that he does not mean Mr. Đukanović as the journalist interpreted it. The journalist further skips all other e-mail correspondence in which Sven Van Den Broeck, director of Aman Sveti Stefan, addresses Mr. Doronjin as 'Mr. D'. Several such e-mail correspondences were submitted to the arbitration and we assume that the journalist and the editor had access to them as well if they had access to this one e-mail correspondence. The journalist further skips the testimony of the director of Aman Sveti Stefan himself on whether in that e-mail, when he says 'Mr. D', he means Đukanović. The witness (Sven Van Den Broeck) explains that he is referring to Vladislav Doronjin, the owner of Aman, and that he most often addresses him that way in his email correspondence, and that this is the usual way of addressing him within the Aman group, among all employees. If the journalist and editor did not have access to the other email correspondences or to Sven Van Den Broeck's testimony, then one could suspect that the source of information consciously wants to misuse them, which after this reaction and the evidence provided should, as expected, result in a different future treatment by both the journalists and the editorial staff of your esteemed newspaper of that specific source of information, its credibility, and ultimately its 'sincere' intentions.

"We did not verify the veracity of the remaining allegations relating to the period before 2009, given that they are not the subject of our interest because during that period our group and Mr. Statis were not part of the long-term lease agreement for Sveti Stefan," the response reads.