{"id":19658,"date":"2018-12-06T09:00:00","date_gmt":"2018-12-06T07:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/127.0.0.1\/irresponsible-officials-still-get-the-biggest-number-of-lightest-penalties\/"},"modified":"2020-04-04T15:22:08","modified_gmt":"2020-04-04T13:22:08","slug":"irresponsible-officials-still-get-the-biggest-number-of-lightest-penalties","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.cins.rs\/en\/irresponsible-officials-still-get-the-biggest-number-of-lightest-penalties\/","title":{"rendered":"Irresponsible Officials Still Get the Biggest Number of Lightest Penalties"},"content":{"rendered":"

An apartment in Belgrade, six cars and about 1,700 square meters of real estate in the territory of the municipality of Brus, as well as several plots approximately twice that surface area, have for years been the property of Serbian Progressive Party<\/em> official and Brus Mayor Milutin Jeli\u010di\u0107<\/strong> and his wife.<\/p>

Jeli\u010di\u0107 also owns a company called Panikop <\/em>in Belgrade, in which he transferred management rights no sooner than at the beginning of November 2018, even though he should have done so back in 2010 \u2013 when the Agency Act came into force.<\/p>

The Anti-Corruption Agency pressed criminal charges against him with the Basic Public Prosecutor\u2019s Office in Brus in May 2018, because he had not reported all property data despite having been obligated to do so under the Agency Act.<\/p>

The municipal chief ended up in the spotlight due to the \u201ccaf\u00e9 on Pan\u010di\u0107\u2019s Peak\u201d case. According to a story by BIRN, in late July the Ministry of Construction, Transport and Infrastructure pressed criminal charges against Jeli\u010di\u0107 on suspicion that, in collusion with Sne\u017eana Mitkovi\u0107<\/strong>, the investor behind the illegal structure built at the top of Mt. Kopaonik, he had brokered and traded in influence by ordering an officer to forge official documents.<\/p>

Jeli\u010di\u0107, who did not wish to speak with the journalists of the Center for Investigative Journalism of Serbia<\/em> (CINS), is one of the four officials against whom the Agency pressed charges in the first 10 months of this year, on suspicion that they had intended to cover up their actual property.<\/p>

\n
<\/figcaption>\n <\/div>

\u201cIn the National Assembly itself these decisions by the Agency are not particularly important, because if they were they would be taken into account when deciding who can be a member of the government and whether someone should be dismissed from that position because they committed a violation\u201d.\u0111<\/p>\r\n

Nemanja Nenadi\u0107, Transparency Serbia Program Director<\/strong><\/p><\/div><\/div><\/div>

Charges were also pressed against Dragan Budujki\u0107<\/strong>, on suspicion that, as an alderman of the Serbian Progressive Party<\/em> in the Kladovo Municipal Assembly \u2013 a position he occupied until 2016 \u2013 he had concealed property.<\/p>

\u201cI didn\u2019t acquire anything, I have two loans which I\u2019m barely dealing with. I didn\u2019t even buy myself a pen while I was in the municipal assembly. I drove my own car to work and I never abused official cars\u201d, Budujki\u0107 told CINS.<\/p>

Before these proceedings, under way before the Basic Public Prosecutor\u2019s Office in Negotin, Budujki\u0107 received a warning and misdemeanor charges from the Agency. In an interview with the journalists, Budujki\u0107 explained that the warning and charges had been caused by his ignorance, since prior to politics he had worked in health care.

In 2018, criminal charges were also pressed against Gordana Radosavljevi\u0107<\/strong>, former assistant minister at the Ministry of Trade, Tourism and Telecommunications, as well as against Stevan D\u017eelatovi\u0107<\/strong>, former director of Resavica<\/em>, a Despotovac-based public company operating nine underground coal mines. The charges against D\u017eelatovi\u0107 were dismissed.<\/p>

The Proceedings against Officials database<\/a> publicized by CINS shows that from its formation in 2010 until November 2018, the Agency sent prosecutors\u2019 offices across the country criminal charges against 81 officials. Among them are one incumbent minister in the Serbian government, several current and former MPs, mayors and municipal chiefs, as well as judges and faculty deans.<\/p>

The criminal charges are just a part of the total 2,766 proceedings the Agency initiated for the purpose of checking the assets of officials and preventing a conflict of interest.<\/p>

Lightest Penalties Most Frequent<\/h2>

The database reveals that the Agency is predominantly inclined to issue the mildest warning \u2013 1,839 warnings in total were handed down to officials in the observed eight-year period, to some of them several times, in different positions, like Minister of Finance Sini\u0161a Mali<\/strong>. The most frequent reason for the warning is a delay in submitting reports on property and income, as well as failure to report property, transfer managing rights, conflict of interest etc.<\/p>

At an individual level, a warning may have some effect if the same official does not repeat that or another form of violation of the law in their subsequent work. However, the problem with handing down such measures is that they remain unknown to other officials, they are not publicized, thereby the possibility that they, too, will be persuaded to break the law less is lost, says Nemanja Nenadi\u0107<\/strong>, the program director of the Transparency Serbia<\/em> NGO.\u00a0<\/p>

A delay in sending a report on one\u2019s own assets, violation of the ban on performing other office or the non-transfer of management rights in a company are the most frequent grounds for the criminal charges the Agency decided to press in 746 cases.<\/p>

In the event that a misdemeanor has been detected, an official may be fined between 50,000 and 150,000 dinars, but data show that a considerable number of proceedings end with fines at a legal minimum, a serious warning or with exceeding the statute of limitations, among other things, because the court could not locate the officials and hand them subpoenas.<\/p>

Due to the incomplete data the CINS journalists received from the Agency, as well as due to the particular method of data search at the Misdemeanor Court in Belgrade, the outcomes of a number of misdemeanor proceedings in the CINS database are not completely known.<\/p>

\"\"<\/p>

Source: the Anti-Corruption Agency; graphic presentation: CINS<\/em><\/p>

However, the Agency also has other ways of punishing irresponsible officials.<\/p>

The Agency handed down the measure of publication of the decision on violation of the law 328 times, and along with it the Agency also publicizes on its website, in the Official Gazette and in other media which official has violated the law and how. Some measures are currently being appealed.<\/p>

Nenadi\u0107 believes that this form of pressure is insufficient:<\/p>

\u201cThe Agency could certainly give its decisions much more publicity, yet it does so only sporadically. In the other part, it is up to the public itself, to what extent the media will cover that which has been publicized. In the third step, at least judging by the experience so far, in many cases those measures turn out to be ineffective as long as there is political support for the official in question. And in situations where it is politically convenient for some reason, then the Agency\u2019s decisions are used as one of the reasons for dismissal\u201d.<\/p>

A Record Holder in Number of Warnings among Ministers<\/h2>\"A<\/a>

Minister of Finance Sini\u0161a Mali <\/strong>received three warnings for being late sending reports, but also because he had not reported all of his property, nor had he transferred management rights in his company at the time.<\/p>

Mali did not answer CINS\u2019 questions by the date of publication of this article.<\/p>

Photo: Nenad Petrovi\u0107<\/strong>, BETA<\/p><\/div>

 <\/p>

On the grounds of conflict of interest the Agency requested the dismissal of 204 officials, i.e. gave a non-binding proposal to the institutions at which they were working to dismiss them. Some of those proposals are currently being appealed. The reasons for the proposed dismissal are, among other things, nepotism in employing members of the immediate family and other relatives, or, for example, the allocation of municipal budget funds to one\u2019s own company.<\/p>

Among the officials who received a dismissal recommendation are some who were handed down the measure twice.<\/p>

Biljana Nikoli\u0107<\/strong>, director of the Ub Health Center, received her first recommendation for dismissal in 2017 after she had employed her son Aleksandar first as an intern and then part-time, while in 2018 she got another recommendation for dismissal because, after a competition in which four candidates met the requirements, she had once again hired her own son, this time full-time. Both times she failed to notify the Agency of the potential conflict of interest. The appeal procedure for the second warning is still in progress. Nikoli\u0107 still occupies the post of Health Center director and refused to talk about the subject with the CINS journalists.<\/p>

The data CINS obtained show that not all institutions follow recommendations for dismissal<\/a>.<\/p>

Nenadi\u0107 says that the fact the Agency is not authorized to order a body to dismiss an official affects decisions on dismissal, but adds that this, too, is a matter of political will.<\/p>

Past Violators of the Law, Today\u2019s Ministers in the Government<\/h2>

The Anti-Corruption Agency initiated proceedings against nine out of the 22 Serbian government members on suspicion of violation of the Agency Act, and the violation was confirmed for seven of them, according to the CINS database on proceedings against public officials<\/a>.

Prime Minister Ana Brnabi\u0107 <\/strong>and three ministers were handed down warnings<\/a> over problems with the data in their property reports.

Brnabi\u0107 received a warning in March 2018 for having failed to report that she owned some land on the Croatian island of Krk, which she had acquired after probate proceedings. In her reply to CINS, Brnabi\u0107 said that she filed an appeal against the warning to the Administrative Court in May 2018, and that the proceedings were still in progress.

\u201cI did not violate the Anti-Corruption Agency Act because I regularly reported my assets. I certainly respect the work of independent and judicial institutions and will abide by any decision of the Agency and the Administrative Court\u201d, Prime Minister Brnabi\u0107 told CINS.<\/p>

Ana Brnabi\u0107, Serbian Prime Minister<\/h2>\"Ana<\/a>

Ana Brnabi\u0107<\/strong> did not wish to comment on the actions of other cabinet members. In that way, she believes, she would violate the presumption of innocence and the rule of law.

Photo: website of Serbian Goverenment\u00a0<\/p><\/div>

Minister of Culture and Information Vladan Vukosavljevi\u0107<\/strong> and Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management Branislav Nedimovi\u0107<\/strong> were handed down warnings in 2015 because they were behind schedule in sending property reports. At the time, Vukosavljevi\u0107 was working at the Belgrade City Administration Secretariat for Culture, while Nedimovi\u0107 was the mayor of Sremska Mitrovica.<\/p>

Nedimovi\u0107 says that he did not submit a property report in 2015 because it had slipped his mind, but that he has submitted it every time since then, even up to three months in advance, as it seems to him.<\/p>

\u201cI think that, in the case of top officials, for the sake of the public and the public funds they manage it is important that [these things] are known\u201c, Nedimovi\u0107 said, commenting on the importance of the Agency Act.<\/p>

Vladan Vukosavljevi\u0107 declined to comment on the proceedings the Agency had initiated against him.<\/p>

A record holder in the number of warnings received is Minister of Finance Sini\u0161a Mali<\/strong>, who received three for being late sending reports<\/a>, but also because he had not reported all of his property, nor had he transferred management rights in his company at the time. Besides that, in 2016, on suspicion of money laundering, the Agency also sent a report on checking Mali\u2019s property to the Higher Public Prosecutor\u2019s Office in Belgrade, which dismissed the charges, while a portion of the case was forwarded to the First Public Prosecutor\u2019s Office as well. In the end, Mali gave 200,000 dinars to charity and the proceedings were suspended. The action in question was the legal option of application of opportunity whereby the prosecution, after striking a deal with a suspect and their fulfillment of obligations, dismisses criminal charges.<\/p>

Mali did not answer CINS\u2019 questions by the date of publication of this article.<\/p>

Slavica \u0110uki\u0107 Dejanovi\u0107<\/strong>, the minister without portfolio in charge of demographics and population policy, is the only incumbent minister in the government against whom the Agency pressed criminal charges. The proceedings, on suspicion that \u0110uki\u0107 Dejanovi\u0107 had hidden information on ownership of an apartment, have been under way since 2014 before the Basic Prosecutor\u2019s Office in Kragujevac. The minister was questioned, but the investigation is still in progress.<\/p>

\u0110uki\u0107 Dejanovi\u0107 says that the subject of the charges is an apartment she sold long before she became a politician.<\/p>

\u201cI have delivered all documentation regarding all the circumstances that were asked of me and I really think I have nothing more to add there. I had evidence for each element which, in fact, refuted the very content of those criminal proceedings\u201d, she told CINS.<\/p>

In the meantime, Dejanovi\u0107 was handed down a 100,000 dinar fine because the Agency pressed misdemeanor charges in 2013. She said the reason for these charges was tardiness of a service of the Ministry of Health, which she had led at the time, in submitting certain data to the Agency which had not had anything to do with her property.<\/p>

\u201cI didn\u2019t acquire anything, I have two loans which I\u2019m barely dealing with. I didn\u2019t even buy myself a pen while I was in the municipal assembly. I drove my own car to work and I never abused official cars\u201d.<\/p>

Dragan Budujki\u0107, former Serbian Progressive Party alderman in the Kladovo Municipal Assembly<\/h2><\/div><\/div>

Misdemeanor charges were also pressed against Zorana Mihajlovi\u0107<\/strong>, the minister of construction, transport and infrastructure, in 2014, because she had not reported significant changes to her property, but the proceedings against her exceeded the statute of limitations in 2016. The Misdemeanor Court handed down 50,000 dinar fines to Minister of Public Administration and Local Self-Government Branko Ru\u017ei\u0107<\/strong>, who was late sending a property report, and Minister of Economy Goran Kne\u017eevi\u0107, who failed to report significant changes to his property.<\/p>

\u201cIn my particular case, the measures were not completely justified nor were they too important, given that I, as a responsible citizen, fulfill my obligations within legally defined periods and respect the work and measures of the Agency\u201d, Ru\u017ei\u0107 told CINS and added that he believed the Agency played an important social part.<\/p>

The Prosecutor\u2019s Office for Organized Crime focused on the property of Minister of Defense Aleksandar Vulin<\/strong> in 2015, based on an Agency report. The proceedings were suspended due to a lack of evidence of the existence of a criminal offense.<\/p>

CINS did not receive any answers from Zorana Mihajlovi\u0107 and Aleksandar Vulin by the time this article was publicized.<\/p>

Prime Minister Ana Brnabi\u0107 did not wish to comment on the actions of other cabinet members. In that way, she believes, she would violate the presumption of innocence and the rule of law, i.e. she would risk affecting the principle of division of government, i.e. the independence of the judiciary.<\/p>

The current ministers are not the only ones who violated the Agency Act \u2013 proceedings were initiated against 10 ministers from several previous cabinets.<\/p>

Five of them received the mildest warning: two former culture ministers, Ivan Tasovac<\/strong> and Bratislav Petkovi\u0107<\/strong>, Alisa Mari\u0107<\/strong> as the minister of youth and sports, Ivan Mrki\u0107<\/strong> while at the helm of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Tomislav Jovanovi\u0107<\/strong> while spearheading the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development.<\/p>

Nikola Selakovi\u0107, Aleksandar Vu\u010di\u0107\u2019s Secretary General<\/h2>\"Nikola<\/a>

In 2014, the Agency issued a recommendation that then justice minister Selakovi\u0107 <\/strong>be dismissed from the position due to a conflict of interest. He appealed to the Agency Board, which never made a final decision in this case. Today he is the secretary general of Serbian President Aleksandar Vu\u010di\u0107<\/strong>.

Photo: website of Ministry of Justice<\/p><\/div>

In early 2012, while he was the minister of culture, Predrag Markovi\u0107<\/strong> awarded his own company Stubovi kulture \u2013 Vreme kulture more than 1.1 million dinars from the Ministry budget. The following year the Agency issued a public decision on violation of the law in this case, and declared the Ministry\u2019s decision and the controversial contract null and void.<\/p>

The same measure was handed down to Mla\u0111an Dinki\u0107<\/strong>, former minister of finance and economy, because he had gotten a job as director at the MD Solutions<\/em> company without the Agency\u2019s consent and before the end of two years as of his departure from office, envisaged by the Agency Act. Dinki\u0107 appealed the decision and the Agency Board put the proceedings up for another review. Although the Agency website says that the Agency\u2019s decision is final, it is impossible to see what happened after the Board\u2019s decision.<\/p>

The Agency also conducted proceedings against Zoran Stankovi\u0107<\/strong>, former health minister, and in 2013 issued a public decision on violation of the law because he had, during participation in a meeting of the Council of Europe health ministers, in a statement to the media, promoted the idea of regionalizing Serbia. That idea was part of the political program of the United Regions of Serbia party, on whose election ticket Stankovic was a presidential candidate. He appealed to the Agency Board and the decision was annulled several months later.<\/p>

In late 2014, the Agency issued a recommendation that former justice minister Nikola Selakovi\u0107<\/strong> be dismissed from the position due to a conflict of interest. Selakovi\u0107 appealed to the Agency Board, which never made a final decision in this case, thus the proceedings are officially still in progress. Selakovi\u0107 is today the secretary general of Serbian President Aleksandar Vu\u010di\u0107<\/strong>.

In the case of Dragan \u0160utanovac<\/strong>, former defense minister, criminal charges were pressed in 2012, but he was acquitted after a trial<\/a>.

\u201cIn the National Assembly itself these decisions by the Agency are not particularly important, because if they were they would be taken into account when deciding who can be a member of the government and whether someone should be dismissed from that position because they committed a violation\u201d, Nemanja Nenadi\u0107 explained, commenting on the proceedings the Agency had launched against current or former ministers.<\/p>

More than Half of Criminal Proceedings Dismissed<\/h2>

\u00a0<\/h2>

\"\"<\/p>

Source: courts in Serbia and the Anti-Corruption Agency; graphic presentation: CINS<\/em>\u00a0<\/em><\/p>

Prosecutors\u2019 offices in Serbia most frequently dismiss criminal charges against officials pressed for failure to report property, show the data CINS found analyzing the outcomes of 81 criminal charges pressed between 2010 and November 2018.<\/p>

A total of 24 criminal charges were dismissed as unfounded, while in 19 cases proceedings were resolved with the application of opportunity, meaning that the officials were ordered to pay certain amounts of money, for example to charity, after which the charges were dismissed.<\/p>

The sums paid on these grounds ranged from 30,000 to 300,000 dinars and were often lower than the officials\u2019 monthly earnings.<\/p>

On the other hand, if a court finds that an official has hidden or provided false information on their property, they may be sentenced to between six months and five years in prison. Being found guilty of this criminal offense also means dismissal from the job and a ban on performing public office for 10 years.<\/p>

The data from the Proceedings against Officials database show that very few criminal charges were resolved before a court \u2013 15 in total.<\/p>

Serbian courts handed down guilty verdicts in 10 cases: among them to two former MPs \u2013 Mom\u010dilo Duvnjak<\/strong> of the Serbian Radical Party<\/em> and Radoslav Mojsilovi\u0107<\/strong> of the New Serbia party<\/em>, as well as to the former head of the municipality of Mladenovac, Dejan \u010coki\u0107<\/strong>, and Serbian Railways Managing Board member Neboj\u0161a Jani\u0107ijevi\u0107<\/strong>.<\/p>

Two officials were put under house arrest<\/a> and had to wear ankle monitors, while all the others received suspended sentences, so to date none of the officials who were convicted after the criminal charges have actually gone to jail.<\/p>

The criminal charges and other documents from criminal proceedings can be found in the database: funkcioneri.cins.rs.<\/p>

Five officials were acquitted of charges of violating the Agency Act. Besides Dragan \u0160utanovac, also acquitted were former MP Dragan Tomi\u0107<\/strong>, former state secretaries at the Ministry of Youth and Sports and the Ministry of Economy, Predrag Peruni\u010di\u0107<\/strong> and Aleksandar \u017divkovi\u0107<\/strong>, respectively, as well as Sne\u017eana Paralidis<\/strong>, a former councilwoman of the Crveni Krst municipality in Ni\u0161.<\/p>

Almost a quarter of criminal charges remain unresolved, and some of them were pressed back in 2013 and 2014, like in the case of Minister without Portfolio Slavica \u0110uki\u0107 Dejanovi\u0107 or MP Goran Je\u0161i\u0107<\/strong>.<\/p>

 <\/p>

This article is funded by a grant from the US State Department. Opinions, findings and the conclusions set forth here belong to the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the US State Department.<\/em><\/h6>
From November 2018 to September 2019 the work of CINS is supported by Sweden, within the Belgrade Open School program “Civil Society as a Force for a Change in the Serbia’s EU Accession Process.”<\/a><\/em><\/h6>

\"\"<\/em><\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Anti-Corruption Agency has so far launched proceedings against Prime Minister Ana Brnabi\u0107 and eight ministers on suspicion of violation of the Agency Act, while in the case of seven of them the suspicion was confirmed, shows research by CINS, which has put together a single database with more than 2,700 proceedings launched against officials across Serbia<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1341,"featured_media":22383,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1492,1572],"tags":[1632,1628,1624,1627,1631,1625,1623,1611,1629,1630,1633,1626,1634],"class_list":["post-19658","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-investigative-stories","category-public-officials","tag-aleksandar-vulin","tag-ana-brnabic-en","tag-anti-corruption-agency","tag-branislav-nedimovic","tag-branko-ruzic","tag-corruption","tag-public-officials","tag-serbian-progressive-party","tag-sinisa-mali-en","tag-slavica-djukic-dejanovic","tag-transparency-serbia","tag-vladan-vukosavljevic","tag-zorana-mihajlovic-en","ciTrackContent"],"acf":[],"featured_image_url":"https:\/\/www.cins.rs\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/Untitled-design.jpg","author_additional":[1120,1131],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cins.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19658","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cins.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cins.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cins.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1341"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cins.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=19658"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.cins.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19658\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":22393,"href":"https:\/\/www.cins.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19658\/revisions\/22393"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cins.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/22383"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cins.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=19658"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cins.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=19658"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cins.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=19658"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}