Vanja Ćalović Marković filed a lawsuit today against the Agency for Prevention of Corruption due to important violations of the rules of procedure, as well as false, erroneous and incompletely established factual situation and misapplication of substantive law when deciding on her alleged violation of the Law on Prevention of Corruption.
The lawsuit states that Ćalović Marković, as a member of the Agency Council, never decided on the initiatives of NGO MANS, since the Council has no competence to decide on specific cases, and therefore could not decide on the initiatives of NGO MANS. The law clearly stipulates that decisions are made exclusively by the Director of the Agency and a dispute before the Administrative Court can be initiated against them, not a procedure before the Agency Council.
The Agency had to know the competencies of its authorities, as well as the fact that the Council could never decide on the complaints of NGO MANS. Therefore, statements listed by the Agency in its decision – that Ćalović Marković decided on the complaints of MANS, are ill-founded and apparently malicious.
The decision of the Agency also states that Ćalović Marković had a private interest on the basis of a contract concluded between NGO MANS and the Delegation of the European Union to Montenegro, but does not specify what this private interest was.
Had the Agency looked at the objectives of the EU-funded projects, it would have found that MANS’ work is focused on achieving precisely the objectives that are the purpose and aim of the provisions of the Law on Prevention of Corruption and the Law on Financing of Political Entities and Election Campaigns, and not on anyone’s private interest. Accordingly, Ćalović Marković had no private but public interest, both in her work in NGO MANS and in the Agency’s Council.
Furthermore, the Agency claims that Ćalović Marković increased her earnings several times after the conclusion of the Agreement with the European Commission, from the gross amount of €140.00 to the net amount of € 1,837.00.
However, in the Annex of the Employment Contract of January 2015, it can be found that Ćalović Marković had higher earnings before signing a contract between NGO MANS and the Delegation of the European Union in Podgorica, not after the contract was signed. Also, after expiration of the contract and completion of the project, in February 2017, the salary of Ćalović Marković did not change until January 2018, which additionally confirms that salary variations had nothing to do with concluded contract with the EU Delegation.
In addition, the Project Budget was available to the Agency, which forms an integral part of the Contract, and it clearly shows that this Contract does not increase her earnings, but a total of €EUR 4,725 is allocated from this project for 15 months of earnings with corresponding full taxes and contributions , i.e. a net of 189 per month.
Although the Agency was aware of all these facts, by its decision, this institution attempts to maliciously demonstrate that the entire value of the project was spent for the profit of Ćalović Marković. Thus, the Agency requested data from the Tax Administration on earnings of Ćalović Marković only for 2016 and 2017, obviously consciously avoiding to determine the amount of salary she earned before the conclusion and after the expiration of the Contract, which it was obliged to do if it had already established the fact that on the basis of that Contract, the salary was increased several times.
Hence, the Agency has shown that it deliberately and intentionally violates the law, that inaccurate and false information is stated in violation of the law, as well as that there is a high degree of suspicion that the Director of the Agency and officials who conducted this procedure and signed the contested decision misuse the official authority to the detriment of Ćalović Marković in the manner defined by the Criminal Code in Article 416 as a criminal offense.
Finally, contrary to allegations contained in the contested decision of the Agency, the contract with the EU Delegation was not concluded by Vanja Ćalović Marković, but NGO MANS. According to this contract, MANS undertook to report all cases of possible violation of laws that it discovers in its work, and provide information to the Agency for Prevention of Corruption, as the authority competent to decide on them. Bearing in mind that the Agency is in charge of detecting abuses in the election process, filed applications by third parties represent a source of information on possible violations of the law and thus enable more efficient and quality work of that institution, not realization of anyone’s private interests.
Thus, NGO MANS, not Ćalović Marković, has undertaken to report violations of the law and use procedures prescribed by the law to protect the public interest and increase the transparency of financing of elections, which is particularly emphasized in the Contract as a key objective of the project. In the contested decision, the Agency does not cite any of these facts and provisions of the Contract, but the expected results of that project, estimated on the basis of previous practice, are ungroundedly and untruly cited as obligations, and not even by NGO MANS, but by Vanja Ćalović Marković personally. At the same time, in that contract there are no words on activities or any obligations of Ćalović Marković in the Agency’s Council.
In addition to the aforementioned, the Decision of the Agency was passed with a number of serious violations of the procedure. The Decision states that it was based on an initiative submitted by Vuk Maraš on behalf of NGO MANS, while it does not decide on any allegations from this initiative, but on completely different items. MANS submitted this initiative exactly in order to force the director of the Agency, who repeatedly accused Ćalović Marković of violating the law, to make a decision and stand behind his charges. Instead, the contested decision does not address any of allegations from this initiative.
Therefore, it is completely incomprehensible on the basis of what the Agency conducted the procedure in the first place, which violations it determined and in what manner, as well as how they were determined and what are the reasons for decision it made.
Moreover, Ćalović Marković, as a party, has never been given the opportunity to plead on the alleged violation of the law that was brought against her by the contested decision, which constitutes a brutal violation of the procedure.
Also, the contested decision was unauthorized and, contrary to the Law, brought by the Assistant Director, not the Director, which also constitutes a significant violation of the rules of the administrative procedure. The contested decision does not contain the reasons which refer to the established factual situation in relation to the decision as given in the disposition, which is an additional violation of the rules of procedure.
Finally, in order for decision to be completely illegal, the amount of legal knowledge was also shown by the Agency in the wrong legal instruction stating that an administrative dispute can be initiated against the decision within 30 days from the date of receipt, although the legal deadline is 20 days.
Bearing in mind all of the aforementioned, it is obvious that it is not a matter of legal issue, but rather political decision and revenge against Ćalović Marković because of her criticism of the Agency’s Director, which was repeated in the European Commission’s report as well.
NGO MANS
