It is also an outrageous and illegal precedent when the Deputy Prime Minister gives, openly and without any restraint, suggestions to the Supreme Court in the media on how it should decide and how it should explain its decision, the Legal Team of Milo and Ana Đukanović announced.
As they state, the basic legal issue of this publicly imposed topic, which is "planned, through cheap media sensationalism, pushed as far away from the law as possible, in order to achieve the equally planned discrediting of the people it concerns, is which legal entity, in a specific legal case, in accordance with the Montenegrin legal system, can have the legal status of an injured party, in a criminal-legal sense, and which, as such, has not appeared in the course of the proceedings so far".
"In the daily political speculations of the on-duty guardians of the legal order and the self-proclaimed criminal persecutors of all dissenters on the social scene, the Government is mentioned now, then the State, as the alleged injured party, and the Government, at the proposal of the 'National Council for the Fight against Corruption', which otherwise has no legally prescribed jurisdiction, 'tasks the Protector of Property and Legal Interests with undertaking criminal prosecution'. An outrageous and illegal precedent. The Government 'orders criminal prosecution'! 'The Government undertook criminal prosecution'," they said.
"In order to make it clear to everyone and forever what kind of abuse this is, the 'criminal legal event' refers to the time after privatization when the State was no longer the owner of the company, while 'Telekom' itself never claimed to have suffered any damage," they add.
As they point out, the protector of property interests, in the description of his legal powers, does not have any jurisdiction to prosecute any legal entity for any criminal offense.
"Someone, however, thought of illegally serving him this jurisdiction, ad hoc, in order to achieve his prosaic political goals, in the case colloquially called 'Telekom', in which two Montenegrin citizens, after twenty years of judicial torture and media and daily political satire of their personalities and trampling on their human dignity, were finally acquitted of all charges. Can anyone compensate them for any kind of enormous damage that was caused to them? The Montenegrin public, as well as the aforementioned citizens and their families, will obviously not receive this answer from the proponents of the planned "new criminal prosecution", now with other people in the role of defendants, who should be stigmatized, especially if they bear the surname Đukanović," they say.
They point out that, for the legal annals, there remains "a long-standing legal position that we had the opportunity to read that the alleged interruption of the relative statute of limitations for criminal prosecution, in a specific legal matter, against new victims of unlawful criminal prosecution, occurred 'by undertaking procedural actions in another criminal case, not against the aforementioned, but against other persons, and precisely those who have been finally acquitted of the charges for the criminal offenses they were charged with'".
"It is also an outrageous and illegal precedent when the Deputy Prime Minister gives, openly and without any restraint, suggestions to the Supreme Court in the media on how it should decide and how it should explain its decision, on a request for protection of legality, which, precisely in relation to the previously mentioned, legally bizarre decision, was submitted by the Supreme State Prosecutor's Office, at the initiative of the Special State Prosecutor's Office! And the Deputy Prime Minister expressly declared the request for protection of legality in the media legally impermissible! Has the Protector of Property and Legal Interests of Montenegro ever undertaken criminal prosecution before, and if so, when, after the Prosecutor's Office, which is bound by the principle of legality of criminal prosecution, on behalf of the State of Montenegro, pursuant to Article 19 of the Criminal Procedure Code, dismissed the criminal report due to the statute of limitations of criminal prosecution, as a permanent procedural obstacle to criminal prosecution, or for any other reason based on the law?", the statement states.
They state that "it is clear to any legal scholar that the Special State Prosecutor's Office and the Supreme State Prosecutor's Office made their completely lawful decisions in the legal matter in question precisely 'on behalf of the State of Montenegro', which they also represent when prosecuting perpetrators of criminal offenses.
"And no one else can replace them in that constitutional role, on behalf of the State. Who else would the State Prosecutor's Office represent, if not the State? But the Government, as well as those who humbly and willingly listen to what the Government tells them in fear, would rather the State be illegally represented in criminal prosecution by someone else, who will "better than the State Prosecutor's Office" suit their prosaic interests of political discrediting those they have targeted as their political opponents and with whom they should be dealt with "by force to shame", not shying away from the abuse of institutions. Anyone who is unclear should read Article 134 of the Constitution of Montenegro, which stipulates that 'the State Prosecutor's Office is a unique and independent state body that carries out the tasks of prosecuting perpetrators of criminal offenses and other punishable offenses that are prosecuted ex officio'. SAPIENTI SAT (smart enough)," they said.
As they say, anyone searching for the truth and the answer to the question asked should go back to the Code of Criminal Procedure from 1929, when the institute of the injured party as a prosecutor (subsidiary prosecutor) was introduced into the criminal law system of the time, modeled on the Austrian criminal procedure law from 1873, if they do not like the legal system of today's independent Montenegro and its current legislation, but they like the legal framework of the Karađorđević dynasty from that time.
"The answer is already known to anyone with even the slightest knowledge of criminal law. Never, never, has the Protector of Property and Legal Interests of Montenegro, nor previous attorneys, in legal practice undertaken criminal prosecution instead of the competent state prosecutor's office, so let the Montenegrin public at least be clear about what kind of abuse and discrimination this is," they conclude.
See more:
Download the app and follow the news
FOLLOW US ON
