At the beginning of November, President Milo Đukanović "wrote" to the Special State Prosecutor's Office (SDT), from which he was also asked in a letter about his newly discovered offshore companies.
The "Pandora Papers" case, in which a written statement was requested from Đukanović, was formed at the beginning of October, after the NGO MANS published information that the President of Montenegro and his son Blažo Đukanović established secret trusts and companies in several offshore destinations during 2012. .
The written statement, the interlocutors claim, is not provided for by law, but is an exception (unprecedented) that confirms that Đukanović has a privileged status in the SDT.
"That method of hearing and giving a statement is not provided for by any regulation. There is no possibility for someone in the capacity of a citizen, or a suspect, to make a statement in writing and to submit his findings in that way," says lawyer Veselin Radulović.
"The procedure is known and it is necessary to follow it - the person who needs to give a statement is served with an invitation to come to the prosecutor's office at a certain time and to verbally communicate the information he has. The prosecution must conduct an oral interview because, according to the logic of things, during the interview there is often a need to ask additional questions, which are also answered orally," explained Radulović.
Chief Special Prosecutor Milivoje Katnić previously stated that a written statement is possible.
"It is given to high officials, not so that they would be privileged or separated from others, but to avoid the procedure of controlling the premises. It is seen that no one has poisoned the water, that there is no explosive device somewhere, and that takes our days. That's why we write down the questions that would be asked to him when he comes and send them to him for a statement. But if he was invited to come, he would certainly have to come," said Katnić.
However, the question of which regulation or law enables hearings with a "written statement" and how many times until now, except in the case of Đukanović, the SDT has requested a written statement instead of a hearing in the capacity of a citizen, suspect or accused.
Lawyer Radulović assesses Katnić's explanation as unacceptable.
"The reasoning that the president of the state could not be summoned to the SDT, and that he submitted the statement in writing for security reasons, that is, because he is a protected person, has no basis and is unacceptable. With that logic, the prosecutor's office could also take written statements from members of criminal clans, with a similar explanation. What is most important - the regulations do not allow such a way of making a statement", concluded Radulović.
Krivokapić can also speak orally - in the prosecution
His statement is confirmed by practice. Three months before the written statement of the President of the State, in mid-August of this year, Prime Minister Zdravko Krivokapić "visited" the Special Prosecutor's Office by invitation. In front of the special prosecutor Lidija Vukčević, in his capacity as a citizen, he explained his statement made during a guest appearance on TV Vijesta, that he was about to be arrested in case he signed the Basic Agreement with the SPC in Belgrade.
At that time, no one mentioned poisoned water and explosive devices.
That is why Veselin Radulović insists:
"I think that this case also shows that the president of the state has a special and privileged status before the prosecution. The Prosecution has shown this in other, earlier cases, with a passive attitude and a kind of lack of interest in properly investigating all suspicions related to Đukanović".
And those cases are not few. Since the formation of the SDT, special prosecutors have investigated Đukanović in more than 30 cases. The vast majority of those cases ended with the dismissal of criminal charges. And none, yet, has reached the proposal for indictment.
"We inform you that in the Special State Prosecutor's Office in the period from January 1, 2015 to October 5, 2021, against M. Đ. A total of 32 cases were formed, of which 27 cases were resolved by dismissing the criminal charges, four cases are still in the investigation phase, and one was assigned to the competent state prosecutor's office for further proceedings and a decision," the SDT replied.
In mid-December, at a conference organized by the Society of Professional Journalists and the Global Initiative to Fight Transnational Crime, Katnić boasted that out of the four cases, which are still in the investigation phase, two were formed by prosecutors on their own initiative. Katnić did not specify what those items were, although it would be interesting to see what they were and since when SDT has been scouting them. Instead, a concise list of those who filed criminal charges against Đukanović was offered.
"MANS submitted 13 applications, individuals and associations 14, other NGOs three and the initiative of the prosecution two", said Katnić.
"If it is proven in court that someone is not guilty, he is not guilty. And we should all respect that," he states.
The chief special prosecutor, as he says, knows that there is another model - that decisions are made on the street, that they are resolved by the Government or some ministries, but that the time has passed when the king or the patriarch decided on this, because there is a division of power in Montenegro legislative, judicial and executive.
The first sister
When referring to the cases that were formed in the SDT based on criminal charges against Milo Đukanović, his relatives and associates, it should be mentioned that the Special Prosecutor's Office, upon its formation, found quite a number of such cases. Perhaps the most famous among them is the "Telekom affair".
The affair was opened a decade ago, at the end of 2011, when the US Securities and Exchange Commission announced that it had evidence of bribery in Montenegro and Macedonia during the privatization of telecommunications companies. Seven years later, the indictment was brought against the former directors of Crnogorski Telekom - Oleg Obradović and Miodrag Ivanović. There is no first-instance verdict yet.
Although in 2011, in the lawsuit against Mađar Telekom, the American investigative authorities claimed that, in addition to its directors, "the sister of the highest state official, who practices law" was involved in the affair, and the public recognized the lawyer Ana Kolarević Đukanović in that wording, for SDT she was and remained clean in that business.
Lawyer Đukanović previously denied the accusations, as did her brother, the prime minister at the time.
"I have no knowledge of corruption. On that topic, despite my best wishes, I can't tell you anything except that there was no corruption in the privatization of Telekom. And I don't have any documentation that could be of interest to you and could be found in the work of the Inquiry Committee", said Milo Đukanović in September 2012.
The prosecutor's team of Vesna Medenica, and then of her successor Ranka Čarapić, worked for years on that case, but they did not find evidence to bring charges. When the SDT was formed, the case was taken over by Milivoje Katnić and special prosecutor Saša Čađenović. Katnić then announced that during the investigation it was established that Ana Đukanović provided services for which she was paid, and that there was no reasonable suspicion that a criminal offense had been committed, because the contract was concluded after the privatization of Telekom Crne Gore. By the way, Deutsche Telekom, as the owner of Magyar Telekom, paid a fine of 100 million dollars in the USA for corrupt actions during the purchase of telecoms in Macedonia and Montenegro.
Let's stay in the process of privatization: The trade union organization AD Port of Adria from Bar submitted a criminal complaint to the SDT against 27 members of the Privatization Council and the Tender Commission, due to the conclusion of the sales contract with the Turkish Global Ports. Bar trade unionists accused them of abuse of official position and negligent work in the service. It was disputed that in the privatization of the former Container Terminal and general cargo, by concluding the contract on the purchase of shares dated November 15, 2013 with the company Global Ports from Istanbul, they enabled the buyer to avoid the obligation to act according to the Social Program as an integral and binding part of the Contract on Purchase action, in which way they enabled the buyer to acquire an illegal property benefit in the amount of around 11 million euros (to the detriment of the workers of the privatized company).
SDT, however, rejected the report against the then Prime Minister and President of the Privatization Council Milo Đukanović, former Vice Prime Minister and Deputy President of the Council Vujica Lazović and 15 other members of the Council and ten members of the Tender Commission, which was headed by Branko Vujović.
One recent story
In mid-August of this year, after two and a half years of investigation, Katnić personally rejected the criminal complaint filed by MANS against Đukanović, the president of Atlas Group, Duško Knežević, Dušan Ban and Željko Mihailović from Podgorica, the former director of the Directorate for the Prevention of Money Laundering, Predrag Mitrović , due to reasonable suspicion that they have committed the criminal offense of money laundering in an organized manner.
The subject of the application was a loan of 1,5 million euros that Đukanović, as the owner of Capital Invest Podgorica, received from the London branch of Piraeus Bank in 2007.
"Djukanović continuously misled the public about how his company took a London loan," MANS announced. "Thus, during the prime minister's hour on November 21, 2013, Đukanović, in his capacity as prime minister, stated in the Parliament of Montenegro that he did not have any deposit to obtain a loan from Piraeus Bank and that he received the loan based on his reputation."
Turns out that's not true. Cash collateral (cash guarantee) in the amount of 1,5 million euros for that loan was provided by fugitive businessman Duško Knežević, through his company Comsel Limited from Cyprus. Previously, the same amount (1,5 million) was paid to the account of the Cypriot company by "two friends" of Milo Đukanović - Dušan Ban and Željko Mihailović. They then concluded an investment contract with Knežević's company, knowing that the money would be used for other purposes - as a guarantee for Milo Đukanović's loan.
There are many who would say that this is a "prime" example of money laundering. SDT had a different attitude. In the explanation submitted to MANS, Katnić states that "there is no well-founded suspicion that the accused have committed the crime in question (money laundering - author's note), nor any other criminal offense for which the person being prosecuted is under official duty." And the end of the story?
In the meantime, the reports against Đukanović were becoming more frequent, resolved in a more or less similar way.
In 2017, Professor Branko Radulović, MP of the Movement for Change, reported Đukanović for creating a criminal organization that committed several crimes related to the exploitation and export of red bauxite. Radulović then announced that the report, in which he cited numerous evidences of crimes committed against property, payment transactions, the environment, abuse of official position, money laundering, creation of a criminal organization, included former Prime Minister Duško Marković, former ministers - Dragica Sekulić , Vladimir Kavarić and Darko Radunović, state (local) officials Miomir M. Mugoša, Veselin Grbović, Darko Konjević, Ivan Bošković and businessman Veselin Pejović.
According to the available information, the case is still under investigation.
We have the same case (the investigation is ongoing) with the latest case that, in November of this year, the SDT formed regarding the allegations of the Albanian oil tycoon Rezart Tači, who mentions Đukanović in the context of international money laundering and suspicious payments in connection with Italian citizens connected to the mafia.
Đukanović, recently in Cetinje, said that "more or less everything has been said in relation to this topic". Saying that he "looks forward to the efficient action of the prosecution and that he will respond to the invitation of any state authority".
"It is a completely fabricated affair. The Cabinet (of the President of Montenegro - editor's note) previously announced that I do not know who these persons are, nor have I had any contact with them. And the bank (the first bank of the first author) said that it had never had contact with those people. I would say that it is a forgery...".
Not all reports against Đukanović were related to money. During 2018, Đukanović was mentioned in two cases based on criminal charges filed for abuse of official position and destruction of voting documents. Special prosecutors Marija Raspopović and Veljko Rutović rejected those reports. During 2019, eight criminal charges were filed against Đukanović, members of his family and persons associated with them, and six criminal charges were filed in 2020. Special prosecutors Marija Raspopović and now-retired Stojanka Radović each dismissed one report filed in 2019, and their colleague Rutović dismissed four cases. The series continued in 2021.
The treatment of SDT towards Đukanović and members of his family has been the target of criticism for years. Katnić and the prosecutors from his team are often accused of "trying to cover up all the traces" that lead to the former prime minister and now the president of the country.
The list of uninvestigated affairs in which political opponents and critics "recognize" Đukanović include KAP (privatization and bankruptcy), tin, Prva banka, "nobody's house", A2A..., including the Pandora papers. The story continues.
Deportation of refugees - a war crime without punishment
Among the reports filed against Đukanović before the formation of the Special State Prosecutor's Office, the one for the deportation of refugees during the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1992 stands out.
In May 2012, university professor Milan Popović, editor-in-chief of the weekly Monitor Esad Kočan and the now-deceased PzP MP Koča Pavlović filed a criminal complaint against Đukanović (the then prime minister) and several former officials of the executive and judicial authorities. They were accused of organizing, or helping the perpetrators to avoid justice, the deportation of Bosnian refugees in 1992, handing them over to one of the warring parties, which is a war crime under current international law.
Among other things, the application was based on the testimony of the former president of Montenegro, the late Momir Bulatović, which was given to the High Court in Podgorica in 2010.
Bulatović then appeared as a witness at the trial of nine former police officers accused of the illegal arrest and deportation of Bosniaks and Bosnian Serbs from Montenegro to Republika Srpska in 1992, after which many of those Bosniaks were executed. Bulatović claimed that there is no individual responsibility in that case.
"It is true that, although a mistake was made, it was a state mistake, not an individual one," he said on that occasion.
The prosecution's response arrived in 2014. The criminal complaint was dismissed with the explanation - there are no grounds. The attitude of Montenegro towards the war crimes committed during the wars in the territory of the former SFR Yugoslavia was also problematized in the recent EC Progress Report.
This text was created with the support of the Resilience Fund of the Global Initiative against Transnational Organized Crime. The opinions and views expressed in the text are the sole responsibility of the Association of Professional Journalists of Montenegro (DPNCG) and do not necessarily reflect the views Global initiatives
Bonus video:
