The Government of Montenegro, through the Protector of Property and Legal Interests, is attempting to continue the prosecution in the "Telekom" case, the Legal Team of Milo and Ana Đukanović announced today.
"Regarding the decision, and then the announcement of the Higher Court in the case known as 'Telekom', the legal team of Milo Đukanović and Ana Đukanović points out that an attempt is being made to present to the public as a legal issue what is, in its essence, a dangerous institutional precedent. The key question is: who is the injured party in this case? The State of Montenegro and its organs have not acted as injured parties for almost two decades - because they could not have been. The actions in question relate to the period after the privatization of 'Telekom', when the State was no longer the owner of the company. Even more importantly, Telekom itself has never claimed to have suffered damage," the statement points out.
The Legal Team of Milo and Ana Đukanović added that "after the Special State Prosecutor's Office and the Supreme State Prosecutor's Office took the position that criminal prosecution is impossible due to the statute of limitations, the Government is now, through the Ombudsman, attempting to continue the prosecution."
"Therefore, the Government 'ordered' criminal prosecution, and this has never happened in Montenegro before. This is not a regular legal procedure. This is an attempt to replace the decision of the State Prosecutor's Office with a political decision. The Constitution of Montenegro is clear: the State Prosecutor's Office is the body that carries out the work of prosecuting perpetrators of criminal offenses. The Government does not have the authority to initiate, order or renew criminal prosecution against any individual," the statement from the Legal Team of Milo and Ana Đukanović reads.
The statement states that it is particularly controversial that the Protector of Property and Legal Interests is being attempted to be assigned a role that the Law does not grant him.
"This body protects the property rights and interests of the State. It is not a parallel prosecution, nor can it serve as a means to continue criminal prosecution when the competent prosecution has already made a decision. The explanation that the statute of limitations was interrupted by procedural actions taken in another proceeding, against other persons, is also unacceptable. Milo Đukanović and Ana Đukanović were not defendants in that proceeding. Procedural actions against certain persons cannot subsequently be used as a basis for extending the prosecution against other persons. We remind you that in the same case, two Montenegrin citizens were exposed to criminal proceedings, public pressure and media lynching for years, only to be finally acquitted. Instead of learning from that experience, the same mechanism is now being tried to be started again," said the Legal Team of Milo and Ana Đukanović.
They say that "this is not a fight for justice, but an attempt to use the legal system as a function of political showdown."
"The legal team of Milo Đukanović and Ana Đukanović will use all legal means before domestic and international institutions to protect the legality, constitutional order and fundamental rights of our clients," the statement said.
The position of the Podgorica Higher Court that the "Telekom" case is not absolutely time-barred opens up the possibility that former head of state Milo Đukanović, his sister Ana and several other individuals will soon be heard in connection with the controversial privatization of the once successful state-owned company.
This, the ruling states, refers to the part that deals with the criminal offense of accepting a bribe, which the Đukanovićs, former representatives of that then state-owned company, the HLT fund, the "Monte Adria" company and Hungarian Telecom - Oleg Obradović, Veselin Barović, Damjan Hosta and Tomaš Marvai - are charged with.
Protector of Property and Legal Interests Bojana Ćirović told "Vijesti" yesterday that she would wait for a new decision from the investigating judge, while at the same time saying that after this court's stance, the prosecutor's office also has an opportunity to re-launch the investigation in the case.
See more:
Download the app and follow the news
FOLLOW US ON


