The Network for the Affirmation of the Non-Governmental Sector (MANS) announced today that the Administrative Court of Montenegro accepted their lawsuit and again annulled the decision of the Agency for the Prevention of Corruption (ASK) which determined that former Prime Minister Milo Đukanović did not violate regulations by traveling to Dubai in March 2010.
As stated by the non-governmental organization (NGO), the verdict means that the case is being returned to the Agency for retrial, but it also confirms once again that the previous ASK leadership, contrary to the law, protected the interests of the most powerful officials in the state.
"The decisions challenged by the Administrative Court were made precisely during the mandate of the Agency's previous management, which persistently refused to treat this case as a serious example of a conflict of interest and an illicit gift on a large scale," the statement said.
As they said, the expenses of the then Prime Minister Milo Djukanovic's trip to Dubai, from March 25 to 30, 2010, were paid for by businessman Duško Knežević through companies from the Atlas Group, thereby violating the provisions of the law regulating the receipt of gifts.
"Based on the invoices published by the media and the statement of Knežević himself, it is clear that return plane tickets were paid for Milo and Lidija Đukanović and the then-minister Branimir Gvozdenović, in the amount of around 6.500 euros, as well as a several-day stay at the luxurious 'One&Only Royal Mirage' hotel in Dubai, which cost more than 20.000 euros. In total, this is a gift trip worth close to 30.000 euros, provided for the Prime Minister, his wife and the minister by businessmen whose companies at the same time had significant interests in the Government of Montenegro," the statement points out.
MANS adds that despite such facts, the previous ASK leadership insisted for years on the position that Đukanović did not break the law.
"This was justified by the claim that paid travel and hotel accommodation were not 'gifts' within the meaning of the then applicable regulations, as well as by referring to the fact that the disputed event took place before the formal establishment of the Agency. Instead of checking who financed the luxury arrangement for the highest state officials and for what reason, the Agency was satisfied with letters from state authorities and the statement of the official himself, thereby practically taking on the role of protector, not controller of his interests," MANS said in a statement.
The Administrative Court, as they said, has on several occasions, deciding on MANS lawsuits, assessed this approach as illegal and illogical.
"The court clearly indicated that not only money and valuables can be considered a gift, but also services, including paid travel and hotel accommodation expenses, as well as any other benefit above the legal limit. It was also emphasized that the liability of a public official is assessed according to the regulations that were in force at the time the gift was received, regardless of the fact that a new institution, such as ASK, was later formed. It is particularly important that the court concluded that the Agency did not properly or completely establish the factual situation, because it relied on formal letters and statements, instead of fully investigating who, when, how and for what reason paid for the trip and stay in Dubai," the statement reads.
They added that this ruling confirms that the case of the trip to Dubai was not a technical error, but a conscious decision by the previous ASK management to practically remove the case of the luxury trip as a gift from the agenda.
"This is a classic example of a gift of enormous value, paid by a man who had close business and political ties with the top government for years, and who at the same time had specific business dealings with the state. Despite this, the Agency's decisions went exclusively towards relativizing and closing this case," it states.
MANS also said that the case of the trip to Dubai fits into the broader picture of the actions of the previous ASK leadership, which repeatedly came under attack from the courts precisely because it did not want to seriously deal with the assets and gifts of top officials.
"In the case of Milo Đukanović's expensive watch collection, the Administrative Court ordered the Agency to conduct a full investigation and determine the origin and reporting of the property, after MANS's initiative was practically forgotten by the previous management. Only after years of delay and court rulings was it determined that the watches had not been reported in accordance with the law. A similar pattern was repeated in the case of Filip Adžić's trip to the UAE, where the Administrative Court determined that ASK failed to establish even the basic facts about who paid for the trip and under what conditions, after which the Agency was forced to admit that there had been a violation of the Law on the Prevention of Corruption," the statement states.
They emphasized that all these judgments clearly show that the problem was in the way the previous management of the Agency understood its role – more as a shield for the powerful, than as an independent institution that controls their interests.
"Therefore, MANS demands that, in addition to the political and institutional responsibility of the former management, a decision be finally made in the case of the trip to Dubai that will be based on facts and the law. The current ASK management is expected to implement without delay everything that the Administrative Court clearly pointed out, to fully determine who financed the trip and with what motive, and based on that to make a decision that will show that the Agency is able to work in the public interest, and not in favor of those whose interests it is supposed to control," the statement reads.
They added that citizens have the right to know who pays for luxury trips for their officials and whether such gifts are returned through decisions of the Government and state bodies.
"The Agency's job is not to look for an alibi for such arrangements, but to fully shed light on them and sanction them. We expect the current ASK leadership to show that it is ready to stop the practice of its predecessors and to finally make a decision in this case that will be in accordance with the law and case law," MANS concluded.
Bonus video:
