The Higher State Prosecutor's Office (VDT) in Bijelo Polje is reviewing the files submitted to them by the Basic Prosecutor's Office in Pljevlja at the beginning of the month, in order to assess whether there are grounds for initiating criminal proceedings against a certain person in a case that occurred in July at the construction site of the investor "Mili Company". when the surveyor was killed Ranko Despotović.
This is what the prosecutor's office told "Vijesta".
"On October 7, 10, the Basic State Prosecutor's Office in Pljevlja submitted to the Higher State Prosecutor's Office in Bijelo Polje the files created on the occasion of the accident that occurred on July 2024, 10 at the construction site of the investor 'Mili Company' doo Kališići in Pljevlja, when surveyor Despotović Ranko from Pljevlja died. In this prosecutor's office, the submitted files are being reviewed, in order to assess whether there are grounds for initiating criminal proceedings against a certain person, due to a criminal offense for which prosecution is undertaken ex officio", states the answer submitted to the editorial office.
According to the report made by the Basic State Prosecutor's Office in Pljevlja on the day of the accident, on July 10, in the afternoon hours, the ground collapsed at the construction site of the investor "Mili Company", and the collapsed earth fell on surveyor Ranko Despotović, who was at that moment on construction site and determined the elevations for building the building.
As stated by the expert in the report Milonja Rakonjac, he "wasn't notified of an injury at work, which was the employer's obligation". Also, the Rulebook on occupational health and safety, the Act on risk assessment for all employees' workplaces, and other required documentation were not submitted to the expert for inspection. The expert, as stated in the findings that "Vijesti" had access to, established that the work on excavations for a commercial building "may also have the character of a dangerous activity, especially if they are not carried out properly and the prescribed occupational health and safety measures are not applied." .
"Which implies that in this particular case, it was necessary to ensure that during the execution of the works, it was ensured that the ground did not collapse, no one should be in the immediate vicinity, i.e. dangerous zone", it is stated in the report of the expert and it is added that after securing, the works could be carried out, and that in the specific case, the earth collapsed from a height of about 10 meters, "which resulted in serious bodily injury with fatal consequences for the surveyor Despotović Ranko".
It is also stated that, before carrying out the works, all workers should have been removed to a safe zone, "thus avoiding injuries at work".
The expert's opinion is that during the determination of the elevation for the construction of the business building, "there was a possible source of danger due to inadequately provided space for work (the place where the work was carried out), and that certain omissions were made that could have contributed to the occurrence of an injury at work.
"How the inspection accepted the contract"
In the opinion of the construction expert Vladimir Perišić, in the introductory part it is stated that it was made on the basis of the minutes of the construction and urban inspection, "because the construction diary is not in the case file". In his opinion, Perišić points to the legal obligation of the contractor to have, in addition to other documentation, a construction diary.
"The impossibility of viewing the construction diary makes it difficult to see the course of events on the construction site itself and to determine the daily activities of the contractor", the expert states and refers to the inspection report from July 16, when "the representative of the contractor stated that he did not submit the construction diary because, among other things , he does not have a contract for earthworks".
The expert also describes the content of the contract between the investor and the contractor, which was given to him for inspection, and according to which, as he states, the contractor performs rough construction works, namely: concrete, reinforcement, testing and masonry, and in this connection he raises the question of who is obliged to perform earthworks, which are defined by the main project.
"How did the competent inspection accept this kind of contract between the Investor and the Contractor during the construction application, when it did not define who will do the earthworks, which are normally the first phase in the construction of this building," states Perišić in his opinion.
In relation to the inspector's statement after the inspection on April 12 that all the conditions for the start of construction have been met, his opinion is that "it is not correct, because the contractor for all works is not defined in the contract for the performance of works...".
He also adds that on April 28, the urban planning and construction inspection ordered the development of a Project for the provision of a foundation pit with rehabilitation measures, but that Project was not submitted, "so that the works that were supposed to be done according to it were not started."
"Which leads to the conclusion that the decision of the competent authority on the ban on construction was not respected," writes the opinion of the expert Perišić.
According to the documentation that "Vijesti" had access to, the basic prosecutor in Pljevlja requested additional expert testimony at the end of August. At that time, as stated, a construction diary was also submitted, and upon inspection of that document, it was established that it was conducted for an incomplete month, from April 15 to May 12, and it is also stated that the contractor, that is, the manager at the construction site, did not sign that diary. In the diary, no work was noted after May 12, and in that document, according to the expert, there are no comments from the construction inspection and supervision on the way the work was carried out.
"It remains unclear who, after May 10, 2024, carried out the works at the location in question," according to the supplementary report of the expert Perišić.
In his opinion, he states that the inspection approved the execution of the works, "although in the Contract on the execution of the works there is a statement that the contractor does not perform earthworks, and it is not defined who should perform them. In this case, the Construction Application with the construction contract defined in this way should not have been accepted...", he states, among other things.
He also adds that "The contractor performed the work without the presence of an expert, the construction site manager, who was otherwise appointed...", and that the inspection or supervision did not state this in the construction diary.
Perišić also adds that the expert supervision signed the construction diary on May 12, that the construction inspection had no objections to the works, and that both supervision and inspection should have warned the contractor that the manager was not present at the construction site.
Lawyer: The accident did not stop the work
Lawyer Maja Zeković, with the explanation that due to the fact that they are in front of the competent prosecutor's office during the investigation, she cannot talk about the details of the case, she told "Vijesta" that the conclusion is one, that the death of Despotović "is the sole consequence of the failure to adequately secure the construction site".
"Especially from the demolition of the land, and it was the demolition of the land from a height of 10 meters that resulted in the death of Despotović," she said, adding that failures in work and elementary responsibility were recorded at all levels, from the investor, through the designer, the auditor, contractor, supervision.
"All this on a construction site where work was otherwise prohibited and measures were ordered to secure the foundation pit - emergency rehabilitation measures by decision of the competent inspection as early as 7/5/2024. Again on 6/6/2024 it was stated by the inspection that the ordered the security works have not started, while the relationship between the contractor, the investor and the supervision is best illustrated by the fact that none of their representatives was present at the inspection on that day. However, the inspection on July 3, 7 again noted in the minutes that work was being done on the same construction site - installation of reinforcement for wall panels, and the accident happened seven days later," said Zeković.
The same works, she added, continued "even after the accident that the inspector stated on July 12, 7, although there are evident deviations from the main project in some of the wall panels".
"On July 16, 7, the Inspectorate prohibited the execution of all construction works until the irregularities are eliminated. The above information, unfortunately, unfailingly says that the works did not stop even then..." said Zeković.
What does the Ministry say?
From the Ministry of Spatial Planning, Urbanism and State Property, which he heads Slaven Radunović, they told "Vijesta" that for the building of the company "Mili Company" the study on the protection of the foundation pit was submitted to the urban planning and construction inspection of that department on July 22, which is 12 days after the accident at the construction site.
"On 25/7/2024, the urban planning and construction inspection went to the field in the presence of the supervision manager and the investor and determined that the works had been started according to the certified and revised study on the provision of the foundation pit. The works that are being carried out are the works of securing the foundation pit according to the certified and revised study", they state in the answer.
Radunović's department did not comment on the newsroom's questions regarding the status of the construction site at the time of the accident in which Despotović was killed, as well as other questions about inspection supervision, and what was pointed out after the expert examination...
The company "Mili Company" did not answer the questions of "Vijesti".
Zeković: What does the prohibition of works mean in practice, if the works continue immediately
Lawyer Zeković believes that the actions and nature of the measures imposed by the competent authorities in cases like the one in Pljevlja, in which Despotović was killed, are questionable.
"Due to frequent accidents of this type, their preventive rather than repressive policy does not help to achieve significant progress in the construction sector, despite the formal harmonization of legal norms with the legal acquis of the European Union, since in practice we have such a blatant violation of all legal, professional and moral the norm," she said.
According to her, "it is questionable who approves the start of construction works and for what reasons", and "what does the prohibition of works mean in real life if these works continue immediately".
"What is the contribution of local authorities in monitoring compliance with regulations in the field of construction works that are carried out in the territories under their jurisdiction", she said, while reminding that the accident at the construction site of the company "Mili Company" happened in the innermost city core of the municipality of Pljevlja.
See more:
Download the app and follow the news
FOLLOW US ON
