Former head of the police said on 29 December last year: “In the future, I’ll take the opportunity to state my attitude on particular issues and relations of organized crime and corruption, politics, security services, media and infomal centers of power.”
What does Veljovic know, but he has not said yet? Was his intention to “speak” really and with the focus on public interest? Was his intention to defend or to attack, or just to protect his personal interest and interests of his close associates?
Will we know more soon? Will the media wait Veljovic or will they ask him something? Will the President of Montenegro, who has Veljovic as his advisor for defense and security, ask him and make a public statment? Will the Government ask Veljovic to communicate his point of view? In the end, will the Parliament’s Committee for Defense and Security require from Veljovic to say what he hasn’t said at the past numerious meetings?
Judging by the reaction during the holidays, no one will engage in particular to find out what Veljovic intended to say. In another country, the words of a former head of police would be an alarm, unlike in Montenegro where this is just another statement in the sea of others.
***
The State Prosecutor’s Office (SPO) arrested the head of criminal police in Budva. SPO said they have a strong suspicion that he exercised an influence against the law and that he asked the investigation of threats against journalist Lakic to take an unknown direction. Serious charge, if supported by the relevant evidence. What evidence can not be valid in this case? In the absence of witnesses, only the recording of the alleged conversation ( which is legally approved). Is there such a recording? From previous addresses to the Prosecutor, I conclude that there is. What will be the epilogue of this case? Probably none.
If this conversation (or any part thereof) really happened, whether the Prosecutor had a moral right to this kind of self-defense? Should she instead make an effort to gather evidence in line with the professional standards, including the secret surveillance measures? Whose are “vanity, personal animosity…” overpowered “sense and professionalism,” as it says Veljovic? Veljovic is probably right when he says that “the mountains trembled again, but the unresolved case is born.”
Just like last year, collateral damage in this case is Vladan Jokovic, a man whose resignation “for personal reasons”, and after the affair “listing”, additionaly empowered the misterious management of the security services. In secret and always by names (especially in the case of politicians and officials) opponent of the State Prosecutor, suddenly became talkative without proof. Why?
***
Media report that the Deputy of the Special Prosecutor for Corruption and Organized Crime (!!!) sought documents from the Commissiom for the allocation of part of revenue from games on chance for four non-governmental organizations. One of the four organizations reacted with the following information: “Unfortunately, we never received the funds from that Commission”. Another organization received “2900 euros” and in the letters”two thousand and nine hundred euros.”
What kind of corruption and organized crime is in question here? Does the Deputy play his own functions and powers? In whose interest is this all about? What message are we sending to the public, if information about her work transmits through the media to which he submits a false denunciation? What kind of message “special” sends to the public if it’s sent with a focus, on one hand, on “Corruption and Organized Crime”, and, on the other, on a number of NGOs? Has she already investigated all denunciations against officials and politicians submitted by citizens and NGOs during all these years? Is this a way of sending a message that it is possible to expect that name of anyone and any organization (or just chosen and corrupted ones) can be a part of the daily press? Would the media, hungry, tired of affairs of officials and politicians, run back into the arms of the obvious falsehood? Is the fact that some parts of the service aim to make pressure on the group of those who doesn’t fit their system of values and destroy citizens’ confidence in the NGOs unsignificant?
***
By the decision of the High Court another judicial case in marathon proceedings. In the case, former directors and officials of the Port of Bar took all the attention. Once the case was opened in the direct way by the SPO staff on the time-being board of directors. Today, four years later, it appears that it will remain a stain on the prosecution and on the police, since they claimed that they have a case, months of detention for a few people and demands for compensation from the budget.
These days, media published that “Special Prosecutor for Organized Crime and Corruption Djurdjina-Nina Ivanovic will submit all the evidence about severe abuse in the Department of Human Resources, Police Department, worth about one million euros, which was collected by former interior minister, Ivan Brajovic, and that she was intenisevely working on it.
Djurdjina Ivanovic, Special Prosecutor for organized crime and corruption: “We need to announce that the Special Public Prosecutor is in a possession of only one piece of information about the alleged abuses in the Police Directorate… No documentation for prosecution along with this information has been provided…”
Minister Brajovic, vice president of the SDP, neither confirmed nor denied either first or second information. Why?
Stevo Muk
President of the Managing Board
This article was originally published at web portal of daily newspapers “Vijesti”.
