Judge Milica Vlahović Milosavljević she rejected the allegations of the indictment that she passed an illegal decision in favor of the godfather of the former president of the Supreme Court Vesne Medenica.
At the trial in the Podgorica High Court, she announced that she completely rejects the claims that she passed the decision in violation of the regulations, which adopted the proposal for determining a temporary measure to secure the monetary claim of the petitioner. By Rada Arsić.
In a two-hour presentation of the defense before the judge Nadom Rabrenović, the accused said that her allegations were confirmed by the fact that the decision was confirmed by the second-instance panel of the Commercial Court.
And Medenica denied guilt yesterday, stating that it was a political process. She said that she did not pressure Vlahović Milosavljević when deciding the case in which her godfather was a party...
The indictment presented that the former president of the Supreme Court, by abusing her official position through incitement, influenced the judge of the Commercial Court Vlahović Milosavljević to make a decision and thus caused damage to the corporation "Ten" based in Moscow.
"It is incredible and paradoxical that I was accused for passing an allegedly illegal decision on the determination of a temporary measure, despite the fact that the decision is legal and as such was confirmed by a higher competent authority - the second-instance Council of three judges. With the filing of this indictment, a legal and binding court decision is declared illegal, although the decision made in the first instance can be subject to review exclusively by a higher instance, which, according to the declared legal remedy, examines the legality of the judge's actions when making the decision... Except that the act that is the subject of the accusation under is not a criminal offense according to the law, I point out that there is no evidence in the files for such a thesis of the accusation, so it is not clear on what basis I was accused in the first place, and even less on what basis the indictment against me was confirmed", she said.
Stress from childbirth
Explaining why she said in the investigation that Vesna Medenica put pressure on her and that she is uncomfortable when someone criticizes her, Vlahović Milosavljević said that she did it two months after giving birth, "in a state of severe stress and special psychophysical exhaustion."
"The defense that I presented in the investigation phase is first of all incomplete, because on that occasion I did not state at all about the decisive facts concerning the criminal offense, but only about the circumstances of the communication with the former president. That is why it was widely reported in the public that I allegedly confessed to the commission of a criminal act".
She said that due to the passage of time of three and a half years, she could not objectively remember all the facts, especially since she handled and resolved almost 1.000 cases during that period.
"During the hearing in the investigation phase, I did not have enough time and opportunities to prepare my defense, because I received the summons for the hearing, which was scheduled for July 12, 2022 at 11.30:11 a.m., by phone from the acting prosecutor the previous evening - July 2022, 20.30. around XNUMX:XNUMX p.m. Apart from being taken aback by the summons, until the moment of the hearing, I was not aware of the circumstances and event that I should state. In order to prepare the defense, I asked for the hearing to be postponed, which was not allowed by the acting prosecutor. I did not read the record before I signed it, and I did not dictate the statement, but it was formulated and entered into the record by the acting prosecutor. I gave my testimony as a nursing mother, two months after giving birth, in a state of severe stress and special psycho-physical exhaustion. During the hearing, I thought and feared that I might be detained, that is, detained, and therefore separated from the newborn child I was breastfeeding, considering that at that moment all persons in the case were in custody. Because of all of the above, I was not able to carefully follow the process of making the record, nor to understand the significance of the sentences that the prosecutor entered in the record on my behalf. This means that my defense is not only incomplete, but also imprecise," she said.
She added that in no case did she think that the former president influenced the decision in any way, because the decision was made in accordance with the law, the factual situation and the evidence in the case files.
"That is the only truth. The qualification that the former president of the Supreme Court is authoritative and very inconvenient when someone criticizes her implies that she has no tolerance for lack of promptness in the work of judges, which is why, as well as due to the fact that a temporary measure is by its nature and by law urgent, about decided on the proposal for determining the temporary measure in question in the shortest possible time, more precisely on the same day when the proposal was submitted to the court on December 27, 12," she announced.
We were a temple of knowledge
Medenica said that she received information about the case from lawyer Željko Aprcović, answering the question of Judge Rabrenović.
"This is anti-European Montenegro. We are not in the field of law, but of politics. I was chosen, perhaps not by chance - the first one, who should have been discredited by the media, and then prosecuted. Media discrediting is persistent and cruel. It's still going. I am not guilty, I did not take any action that would have induced Vlahović Milosavljević to act illegally, threatened her or offered her profit. Let someone come forward if I was repressing. While I was at the head of the Supreme Court, it was the temple of knowledge and the backbone of the legal system. This is pure revanchism and smoldering hatred towards me," said Medenica.
She mentioned that special prosecutor Jovan Vukotić said at one of the previous hearings that two applications - Signal and Telegram - were deleted from her phone while she was in the police at five o'clock in the morning, adding that she gave the codes only at the prosecutor's office.
"That evidence around my messages is contaminated. Someone hacked my phone. If he deleted messages in my favor, he could also write to my detriment," she emphasized.
As she added, there is no order for that action, but the decision of the director of the National Security Agency (ANB), which in her practice, she claims, could not be evidence.
Medenica said that she is proud of her work, of her 40-year career.
"I dealt with the results, that the decisions were legal - that's what I demanded, that the citizen come for justice and that he can expect justice," the accused pointed out.
She also claims that the indictment against her would not have come about if the investigation had been objective.
"I have never influenced any judge. And so in this case. If I spoke with Vlahović Milosavljević, I spoke based on the facts. You cannot encourage someone to make a legal decision. Where is the harm here", said Medenica.
She added that the protagonists of the new government expect judges to be administrative bodies that will implement their decisions and wishes.
"When politics enters the courtroom, people of certain qualifications are elected. This time, a novice prosecutor was chosen. First of all, in my opinion, the indictment is a mockery of both the law and logic. The measure of truth in this courtroom must be evidence, not their wish," Medenica pointed out.
The solution is still in effect
Vlahović Milosavljević pointed out that the decision on determining the temporary measure was made in full accordance with the law, which means that the decision is legal.
"And with a legal court decision, it is not possible to commit any criminal offense, and therefore not even the criminal offense of abuse of official position, which is charged against me in the indictment. Therefore, the temporary measure was determined, not on the contrary, as it was wrongly presented in the indictment, but precisely in accordance with Article 287 and Article 288 of the Law on Enforcement and Security. In the indictment, the prosecutor ignores the fact that the decision in question on determining the temporary measure, which was adopted in the first instance, became legally binding after 33 days from its adoption, as it was examined and fully confirmed by a higher competent authority in the legal remedy procedure. and that of the second-instance panel of three judges of the Commercial Court. That decision is still in force, and it will be in force until the final conclusion of the civil proceedings... which is still ongoing", said the accused.
Bonus video:
