Forgotten interchange and additional works on the highway: No one is to blame for hundreds of millions of damages

There is no one responsible for the hundreds of millions of euros of damage caused by the forgotten interchange and additional works on the part of the "Princesa Xenia" highway, which was opened in July last year.

This results from the letter of the Supreme State Prosecutor's Office to the institution of the Protector of Property and Legal Interests of Montenegro.

They considered the complaint against the work of the Special State Prosecutor's Office, submitted by the institution of the Protector, headed by Bojana Ćirović.

According to the files available to "Vijesti", the Special Prosecutor's Office rejected the application of the Network for the Affirmation of the Non-Governmental Sector (MANS) at the end of 2022 and assessed that there was no criminal offense of abuse of official position.

MANS filed the complaint back in 2019, against the then Minister of Transport, and the current Social Democrat MP Ivan Brajović, and non-governmental persons who participated in the preparation and contracting of the construction of the section of the highway from Podgorica to Mateševo ​​due to suspicion of abuse of official position. In that report, it was specified that they "damaged the state budget by about 134 million, which is about 2,5 percent of Montenegrin GDP."

Brajović previously denied the accusations on several occasions, claiming that there was a loophole in the project terms of reference and the offer for the construction of the priority section.

Ćirović, in his complaint about the work of special prosecutors, indicates that it is a matter of damage of as much as 300 million euros.

"Brajović and other officials of the executive authority did not anticipate a number of additional works, so the section of the highway cost 300 million euros more than announced, and this amount represents the calculation of the basic price of the works, additional and 'forgotten' ones, interest and exchange rate. differences", it is stated in the complaint that Ćirović submitted to the Supreme State Prosecutor's Office in mid-January.

However, the prosecutor in the Supreme State Prosecutor's Office, Veljko Rutović, replied to her at the end of January that "the assessment of the complaint and the case file determined that the special prosecution acted in accordance with its legal powers and made the correct decision to dismiss the criminal complaint".

Rutović instructs the Protector of Property and Legal Interests that she has the right to file an indictment against persons from the criminal complaint to the High Court in Podgorica.

Ćirović: I will ask the investigative judge of the High Court to carry out the actions

Ćirović told "Vijesta" yesterday that she will use the right from the Criminal Procedure Act.

"And from the investigating judge of the High Court in Podgorica, with a proposal to request the implementation of investigative actions that I believe were not undertaken, but had to be undertaken, in order to be able to speak with certainty about the existence of well-founded suspicions, possibly responsibilities tomorrow," she answered.

In her complaint to the VDT, Ćirović reminded that according to the MANS report, "...Brajović and other officials of the executive authority did not anticipate a number of additional works, so the section of the highway cost 300 million more than announced".

"...And it is about the amount that represents the calculation of the basic price of works, added and 'forgotten' works, interest and exchange rate differences. It was further stated that the construction contract did not specify all the works, such as the Smokovac interchange, the electrical and water supply network and all the access roads on the other interchanges, as well as that it is disputed because the loan was contracted in dollars, which was done without providing protection against exchange rates. difference," the complaint states.

It is also emphasized that "according to the opinion of the Protector, the acting prosecutor had to start from the very preparation of the tender documentation, the conceptual design and its revision in order to draw a proper conclusion as to whether there is a reasonable suspicion that the suspect has committed a criminal offense for which he is being prosecuted ex officio , possibly another person".

According to Ćirović, it is hardly acceptable that such "failures" occur on the largest and most important project of the state so far, but "and how it creates suspicion that the works were intentionally left out, so that possible material benefits could be realized through the realization of new works for NN individuals, and to the detriment of the state of Montenegro".

"...For the reason that it was necessary to carry out an expert examination by an expert in the construction profession who will answer the question of what constitutes a conceptual project (Article 77 of the Law on Spatial Planning and Building Construction), whether a conceptual project of this type had to be revised, what are the follow-up works, is it professional that the conceptual project of the highway does not include a loop, nor electrical or water infrastructure, and most importantly, why is the Smokovac loop not included in the conceptual project. "Given that the plaintiff only dealt with electrical installation, it is not clear how, with whom and in what way the construction of the loop and other omitted works was contracted," the complaint states.

Conceptual project without mandatory revision

Ćirović warned the VDT that "the focus of the prosecutor's office, when assessing whether a criminal offense has been committed, had to be the procedure for preparing the tender and preparing the conceptual project."

"Then, why was the conceptual project not subject to revision, and it had to be, bearing in mind that it is the largest project of the state, and what obligation is prescribed by the provision of Article 9 of the Law on the Bar-Boljara highway. Article 76 of the Law on Spatial Planning and Construction of Buildings stipulates that the conceptual solution determines the general concept for building the building, and in particular: fitting the building into the space; the location of the facility within the location and in relation to neighboring facilities; 3D object visualization; conditions and solutions for connecting the building to traffic, installation and other infrastructure and arranging the location. According to Article 77 of the same law, it is prescribed that the Conceptual Project determines: position, capacity, architectural, technical, technological and functional characteristics of the facility; organizational elements of the construction of the building", explained Ćirović in the complaint.

She emphasized that the offer of the Chinese company "China road and bridge corporation" (CRBC) was given on the basis of the conceptual design, which, she states, is not disputed.

"However, it is also disputed why that conceptual project does not include the Smokovac interchange, nor does it include electrical and water infrastructure, given that it is not a highway. This is exactly the question for Ivan Brajović, and especially why he is revising the project after the submission of the offer from the Chinese company, at which moment it should have been clear to the prosecutor that there was an intention that the conceptual project did not include the Smokovac interchange, nor the electrical and water infrastructure," she warned. is she.

That is why, Ćirović emphasizes, the investigation had to deal not with what followed the signing of the framework agreement and the contract on the design and construction of the highway, section Smokovac-Uvač-Mateševo ​​with the Chinese company, but with what preceded the conclusion of those acts. especially works that were not foreseen in the conceptual design and the satisfaction of the legal procedure when concluding the contract for the execution of those works.

MANS: We asked for an insight into the case files

MANS told "Vijeci" that "according to the Law on Free Access to Information, they requested complete case files from the competent prosecutor's office, on the basis of which they made a decision that in the case of Brajović there is no responsibility or a criminal offense that can be prosecuted under official duty".

"But also the case files on the basis of which prosecutor Rutović claims that there is no room for complaints about the work of the competent prosecutor. We hope that the prosecution, in order to increase the transparency of the entire procedure, will enable us to gain insight into the files and that this will be the first step towards continuing the prosecutorial reform and increasing the responsibility in the work of prosecutors, especially when it comes to high-level corruption cases, i.e. in cases for which there is a suspicion that great damage has been caused to the budget", MANS said.