Perović claims that he did not discuss with his godfather Jovanić about security work in bankruptcy proceedings

Perović said that his company provided security for the "Boksite Mine" from 2007 to 2009, as far as he remembers, and that this job had nothing to do with acquisition procedures, as well as the security job at the Aluminij Kombinat in 2008.

7637 views 8 comment(s)
Jovanić (archive), Photo: Luka Zeković
Jovanić (archive), Photo: Luka Zeković
Disclaimer: The translations are mostly done through AI translator and might not be 100% accurate.

The trial of former president of the Commercial Court of Montenegro Blaž Jovanić and the other defendants continued today in the High Court in Podgorica.

Presenting his defense before the court, the owner of the company for the security of persons and facilities, Darko Perović, stated that he had a company that dealt with security long before Blažo Jovanić was elected president of the Commercial Court. He confirmed that he is the godfather with Jovanić, but that they never discussed security work in bankruptcy proceedings.

The defendant clarified that in 2003 he founded a company that dealt with the protection of property and persons, "Gardijan" DOO, of which he was the owner and executive director. He stated that he sold the company in 2010 to a renowned company from Sweden, Sekjuriti AB Stockholm. He added that in the part of the company that covered the Montenegrin market, he remained the executive director. The defendant states that the Swedes sold the company to him in 2020, and since then he has been the executive director and owner of the company.

Perović pointed out that in ten years of business, the Swedes in Montenegro have given many donations.

Clarifying the involvement of his company and security in the bankrupt company "Bjelasica Rada", the defendant claims that it was a completely legal business in which the bankruptcy trustee was the defendant Sreten Mrvaljević, whom he has known since his student days. He added that it was the only job for which Mrvaljević, as bankruptcy administrator for security affairs, engaged his company. The accused pointed out that in that case the amount of money that was determined for that job was exaggerated, and that for 11 months that amount was 112.000 euros, not as the media claimed for three months, and that VAT of 18.584 was also included. euros, which was duly paid in 11 monthly installments.

"My company worked on a total of five bankruptcies during the period when Blažo Jovanić was at the head of the Commercial Court from 2014 to 2022," said Perović.

Answering Jovanić's questions, Perović said that his company provided security for the "Boksite Mine" from 2007 to 2009, as far as he remembers, and that this job had nothing to do with acquisition procedures, as well as the security job at the Aluminum Combine in 2008. Jovanić stated that it is obvious that Perović's company was doing security and protection work long before he was elected to the position of president of the Commercial Court.

The defendant Omer Markišić declared that he is not guilty, explaining that he has been working as an appraiser for more than 30 years, and that he has never been a member of any criminal organization.

The continuation of the trial is scheduled for December 18.

The Special State Prosecutor's Office filed an indictment against the former president of the Commercial Court, Blaž Jovanić, bankruptcy trustees Saša Zejak, Snežana Jović, Sanja Lješković, Ranko Radinović, Sreten Mrvaljević, but also Pavić Globarević, Stana Čelebić, Darko Perović, Omer Markišić, Dejan Golubović, Danijela and Dušan Laković and the companies "Titan security" Podgorica, "Securitas Montenegro" Podgorica, "Top force system" Nikšić and "Ogimar MNE" Podgorica, due to the well-founded suspicion that they have committed the criminal offense of creating a criminal organization and several criminal offenses of abuse of office.

As stated in the indictment, Jovanić is accused, among other things, of having organized a criminal organization during 2015 that operated on the territory of Montenegro until April of this year, and whose members became the other defendant natural and legal persons and more other, so far unknown persons whose goal was "committing criminal acts of abuse of official position, for the purpose of obtaining illegal profits, and the activity of the criminal organization is planned for an unlimited period of time and based on the application of certain rules of internal control and discipline of members".

The indictment states that each member of the criminal organization "had a predetermined task or role, and economic and business structures were used in the operation of the criminal organization, and there was influence of the criminal organization on the judiciary and other important social and economic factors."

"From the evidence gathered in the reconnaissance and investigation, there is a well-founded suspicion that the criminal organization had and was carrying out its criminal plan to abuse the official position of the defendants who were authorities or participants, i.e. alleged participants in the bankruptcy proceedings, over the bankruptcy debtors: "Euromix Tours" DOO Budva , "Sotto la Collina" DOO Podgorica, "Nega Tours Montenegro" DOO Budva, "Bjelasica rada" AD Bijelo Polje, "Montri" DOO Igalo, "Prince & Co" DOO Kotor, "Montel" - Motel Glava Zete DOO Nikšić and " Jastreb" DOO Podgorica, in the Commercial Court of Montenegro, in which the defendant Jovanić was the president and acted as a bankruptcy judge, and the defendants Saža Zejak, Sanja Lješković, Snežana Jović, Ranko Radinović and Sreten Mrvaljević participated as bankruptcy trustees, that is, the defendants Lješković and Zejak and as appraisers and court experts and associates of the bankruptcy administrator, and the defendant Jovićeva also as a lawyer, obtains material benefits, through illegally increasing the costs of bankruptcy proceedings, by delaying them and engaging other defendants and other persons as associates, lawyers, appraisers and court experts or for providing the service of physical security of assets of bankrupt debtors, even when it is absolutely unnecessary, in order to pay them fictitious and undocumented fees and expenses for participation or alleged participation and work in bankruptcy proceedings, i.e. for allegedly given the most favorable offers for making property appraisals of bankrupt debtors, even though such accepted offers for property appraisals were many times higher than the real costs of the appraisal, and which costs were approved by the defendant Jovanić," the indictment reads.

On Thursday, about the abolition of detention on bail

Lawyers Predrag Đolević and Velibor Marković, defense attorneys for Blaž Jovanić, proposed the abolition of custody, but the court refused. They pointed out that he has been in detention for more than 18 months, and that the reasons for the detention being ordered and extended no longer apply.

"We pointed out that on November 10, 2023, the Constitutional Court adopted three constitutional appeals that were submitted against the decisions of the Court of Appeal on the extension of custody, given that a verdict was also handed down earlier on another constitutional appeal. This means that four verdicts were handed down on decisions In three judgments, based on the decisions of the Court of Appeal on the extension of detention from April 09, June 09, and August 09, the Constitutional Court found a violation of human rights and illegality related to the decisions on detention, while in the fourth, it annulled the decision from April 09. of October of the Appellate Court on the extension of custody and sent it back for re-decision. The Appellate Court, according to the verdict of the Constitutional Court, should cancel the decision of the High Court on the extension of detention, and the High Court should decide again, taking into account the verdict of the Constitutional Court", stated Đolević.

The president of the special council of judges, Zoran Radović, today rejected the defense's proposal to cancel custody and said that tomorrow he will make a decision regarding the cancellation of the decision of the Court of Appeal on bail, because that decision of the Court of Appeal on the refusal to accept bail was canceled by the judgment of the Constitutional Court.

Bonus video: