Was there a scheme of unlawful influence by Vladimir Novović?
Extensive documentation submitted by Lidija Mitrović to the Supreme State Prosecutor Milorad Marković strongly targets Chief Special Prosecutor Novović, alleging that he used various methods to exert unlawful influence over the work of High Court judge Nenad Vujanović, as well as three judges of the Court of Appeal - Vesna Moštrokol, Predrag Tabaš, and Zorica Milanović. For now, there is no public information from the Supreme State Prosecutor’s Office on whether it will take action based on the two criminal complaints
There were both political and personal motives behind my persecution - claims former special prosecutor Lidija Mitrović in the explanations of two criminal complaints. She avoided serving a seven-month prison sentence by fleeing.
In extensive documentation sent by mail to the Supreme State Prosecutor’s Office - and to several media outlets, including Television E - Mitrović precisely lists the behind-the-scenes connections which, she claims, led High Court judge Nenad Vujanović and the three-member panel of the Court of Appeal - Vesna Moštrokol, Predrag Tabaš and Zorica Milanović - to act on the orders of Chief Special Prosecutor Vladimir Novović.
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN NOVOVIĆ AND VUJANOVIĆ
In her criminal complaint to Supreme State Prosecutor Milorad Marković, filed against Vladimir Novović and his deputy Miloš Šoškić, Mitrović claims that personal and family interests existed.
Primarily, between Novović and High Court judge Vujanović:
- They are in close, friendly relations. As a member of the Judicial Council, Novović supported the appointment of Vujanović’s wife as a judge of the Basic Court in Bijelo Polje on July 30, 2021, and already by March 13, 2023, together with Novović’s wife, she was appointed to the Administrative Court of Montenegro, which represents significant advancement in a short period of time. The information that Novović promised judge Vujanović assistance in being elected as a Constitutional Court judge shows that the seven-month sentence against prosecutor Mitrović also received concrete compensation - Mitrović states in the complaint.
As one of the pieces of evidence that judge Vujanović unreservedly fulfilled Novović’s requests, Mitrović cites the judge’s „lack of interest in any proposal or objection by the defendant during the proceedings“.
WHEN THE SSPO CONTROLS
After securing control over the work of the High Court judge, the Chief Special Prosecutor allegedly directed all efforts toward influencing judges of the Court of Appeal.
- This was not a problem for him, as he created an infrastructure that would accomplish it through his mediation. When it comes to judges, Novović possesses a very effective weapon. Extracted data from seized phones, especially those of the now-convicted Vesna Medenica. These data are used with the help of the acting prosecutor as needed and in a targeted manner - the complaint states.
As a reminder, Mitrović points out that on April 24, 2024, the portal „Vijesti“ published an article titled „She admired Medenica, now wants Dujović’s chair“, on the very day Mirjana Popović was elected President of the Court of Appeal. According to Mitrović, the article targeted Popović by stating that „Vijesti“ possessed „extensive and intimate phone communication between Popović and then-President of the Supreme Court Vesna Medenica“.
According to the complaint, Novović or someone from the Special State Prosecutor’s Office provided parts of that communication to a privileged media outlet to influence decisions of certain judges - in this case, Mirjana Popović, but also others from the High Court to the Court of Appeal.
- Published messages through the media are used as a channel for a kind of pressure and as a signal that loyalty to the SSPO is expected - Mitrović concludes.
WHEN „COURTS ARE DISCIPLINED“
Using the same principle, Mitrović claims, Novović could pressure other Court of Appeal judges, even securing a change in the panel that ruled on the High Court verdict sentencing her to seven months in prison.
That sentence enabled Vladimir Novović to permanently remove Lidija Mitrović from the Special State Prosecutor’s Office. The newly formed panel of the Court of Appeal confirmed the verdict, even though the same court had previously determined that judge Vujanović had committed significant procedural violations.
A decisive role was allegedly played by judge Vesna Moštrokol. Her role, according to Mitrović, was fully exposed:
- Judge Moštrokol was a member of the three-judge panel in the previous proceedings as its presiding judge. Her positioning as a reporting judge in the new proceedings was not accidental – Mitrović highlights.
NO RESPONSE FROM THE SUPREME STATE PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE
This example, according to the claims, demonstrates the strength of external influence on the Court of Appeal. Judge Vesna Moštrokol, who presided over the panel that annulled the first High Court verdict, later acted as reporting judge and suggested confirming the same verdict she had previously opposed.
Alleged unlawful influence by the leadership of the Special State Prosecutor’s Office on judicial proceedings was the key reason why Lidija Mitrović filed two criminal complaints: against Vladimir Novović and Miloš Šoškić, as well as judges Nenad Vujanović, Vesna Moštrokol, Predrag Tabaš, and Zorica Milanović.
In an effort to learn about the next steps of the Supreme State Prosecutor’s Office, Television E sent two questions to the office of Milorad Marković, asking whether they had received the two complaints against the leadership of the Special State Prosecutor’s Office, the High Court judge, and the three-member panel of the Court of Appeal.
By the end of the day, no response had been received from the Supreme State Prosecutor’s Office.