The Special State Prosecutor's Office (SDT) should determine all the facts and circumstances surrounding the adoption of first- and second-instance decisions in the case of a 'coup', High Court judge Suzana Mugoša said in a statement.
She said in a statement delivered to "Vijesti" that she is convinced that the decision of the Appellate Court is a purchase.
Mugoša stated this in response to the statements of the President of the Assembly and the New Serbian Democracy Andrije Mandić and the leader of the Democratic People's Party Milan Knežević, who said today that the public should know whether there are any more operational data and correspondence between the former President of the Supreme Court Vesna Medenica and Mugoša, who is issued a guilty verdict in the "coup d'état" case.
Mugoša said that she has been exposed to media harassment for seven years, and that today her name was linked to buying the verdict, because Mandic is convinced that the first-instance verdict was bought.
"I agree with the defendants Andrija Mandić and Milan Knežević, that the SDT should determine all the facts and circumstances surrounding the adoption of both the first and second instance decisions, because I am also convinced that the decision of the Court of Appeal was bought, that is why the decision of the Court of Appeal is a forgery of an official document, and that is what I said and a year ago, because the judge who wrote the second-instance decision incorrectly and untruthfully quoted words and parts from the first-instance verdict with the obvious intention of changing the essence," said Mugoša.
She added that she claims this because a judge with so many years of experience does not make such mistakes by accident.
"But she probably thought that no one would deal with it, given the volume of the verdict and the evidence. Even today, I stand by my decision and responsibly claim that it was made solely and exclusively, based on the case file. I am additionally convinced that the decision of the Court of Appeal was bought on the way in which it was abolished because they had the possibility, if the appeals were founded, to make another legal conclusion and pass an acquittal, but they did not do it," Mugoša said.
She said that only she is responsible for every decision she made, because every decision she made was solely and exclusively made on the basis of the case file.
"This is Montenegro and everything is known, I am calmly waiting for it to be finally determined why such a decision of the Court of Appeal was made," Mugoša announced.