Officials of the Police Administration (UP) illegally detained in June Vuk Iković, councilor of "Preokret" in the Danilovgrad Municipality Assembly, because he did not have an identity card, and after he took a photo of their illegally parked official vehicle.
They did not inform Iković of his rights either before or after he was brought to the official premises.
This is stated, among other things, in the opinion of the Protector of Human Rights and Freedoms, and after Iković sent a complaint to the Ombudsman regarding the behavior of the police officers, with allegations that he was "detained" without grounds, and that the police officers did not treat him adequately and professionally behaved during legitimation.
The controversial event took place on June 9, after Iković pointed out to four uniformed officers of the UP that their official vehicle was illegally parked on a green surface, which he photographed.
In the opinion of the Protector, signed by the deputy Mirjana Radovic, among other things, it was stated that, based on the submitted complaint and submitted documentation, as well as the statement of the Podgorica Security Department, and the exempted documentation, it was determined that an official UP vehicle was illegally parked on the green area in Svetozara Markovića Street, that it was a van , which were used by police officers of the Intervention Unit Station of the OB Podgorica. That Iković was passing that vehicle around 18.20:XNUMX p.m. and taking photos of it, when four police officers appeared at the vehicle and identified him. As stated, Iković did not have any documents with him on the basis of which his identity could be determined, after which he was taken to official premises.
It was established that no means of coercion were used against him, but also that he was not familiar with his rights.
The Protector points out in his opinion that "the then valid Law on Internal Affairs, that is, Article 77, did not prescribe bringing for the purpose of establishing identity".
"Furthermore, there is no evidence in the case files that the complainant was aware of his rights before being brought. The Protector reminds that Article 79 of the Law on Internal Affairs stipulates: "The police officer is obliged to inform the person he brings, in his language or in a language he understands, about the reasons for bringing him and his rights...", the opinion reads and adds that in that case there is also an exception, "if there is a probability that the person to be brought will resist", but that this was not applicable in this particular case.
The protector also states that "there is no evidence in the case files that the complainant, after being brought to the official premises, was aware of his rights".
"The defender indicated in the preventive mandate that it is necessary for the persons who are brought to be informed of their rights, and for instructions to be issued in this regard, which was done in June 2024, but, in the specific event, there is no evidence that acted according to instructions", the opinion states and adds that "the described behavior of police officers... when it comes to the application of police authority - the act of bringing, leaves room for abuse of authority, especially when it comes to legally ignorant parties, who were not informed about what rights are available to them and how and when they can use them."
The opinion also stated that a notification was taken from Ikovic in his capacity as a citizen, that a record was made about it, but also that "there is no evidence in the case file that the plaintiff was informed about the collected notification from the complainant, which... points to illegal action of a police officer".
"The defender reminds once again that the fight against exemption from responsibility must start at home, i.e. within the service itself (police or prison, military authorities...). In many cases, when there are allegations of abuse by an official, colleagues stick together out of loyalty and help each other, and sometimes even cover up the illegal actions of other colleagues... it was necessary to inform the prosecuting attorney about the contents of the minutes, i.e. according to the complainant, in order for the Basic State Prosecutor's Office to have timely and complete disposal of all information that may be of importance for making a prosecutorial decision," the opinion reads.
The protector, as it is added, "reminds that good administration, in accordance with its principles and principles, implies that the administration is focused on the needs of citizens, that it is open and accessible to citizens, that it acts with respect and attention, that it treats citizens equally in the same and similar situations".
"Failure of public administration authorities in accordance with the above may cause dissatisfaction, injustice or serious damage to both public and private interests. In this sense, the apology of the head of the OB Podgorica can be considered as a way of taking responsibility and contributes to strengthening citizens' trust in the actions of police officers", the opinion reads.
As stated in the document, Iković was punished for a misdemeanor, in accordance with the Identity Card Act, and the police officer, who was driving the official vehicle that he parked on the green area, was given a disciplinary measure for a minor breach of official duty.
The Protector made three recommendations to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, i.e. UP.
"That in future actions: consistently act in accordance with the provisions of the Law on Internal Affairs and valid instructions with a special focus on the application of police powers towards citizens and informing them of their rights depending on each specific situation; to promptly and fully inform the competent state prosecutor's office of all collected information that may be of importance for making a prosecutorial decision, and to ensure consistent compliance with national regulations, confirmed international treaties and generally accepted rules of international law, which relate to respect for human rights, with a special emphasis to ensuring zero tolerance of abuse.”
Bonus video:
