A CORPORATE–JUDICIAL AFFAIR IN BiH part 6
In the first part of the series “A corporate-judicial affair in BiH”, we published the text titled “Judicial ineffectiveness in service of individual unjust enrichment”. There we described how the Municipal court in Mostar and the judge presiding over the case have intentionally abused their discretionary autonomy, afforded to them by virtue of the position as the judge, to undertake an incredible scheme – they usurped judicial competencies of the Supreme court of FBiH. They placed themselves in the role of a sovereign and above the Constitution.
In the second part of the series “A corporate-judicial affair in BiH”, we published the text titled “DRAWER – a model of obstruction of the rule of law”, where we presented evidence in the form of a document signed by the judge presiding over the case, Nina Ratkušić. The document details violations of professional standards of judicial duty and unjustified delay of the process of counter-enforcement, thereby illegitimately favoring one, and damaging the other party.
The third part of the series was a text titled “Family ties”, which is included as an example of how the local builder used illegal court judgments to extort alleged damages in the amount of 1,070.000 BAM. The international bank paid the local builder’s damages, because the local court held that the bank was at fault because an alleged purchaser Ljerka Ostojic withdrew from her sale contract for commercial property 300m2 in size. We described how the local builder, after he unjustly enriched himself with the illegal court judgments, paid back the advance on the sale to Ljerka Ostojic. In turn, she either “purchased” or “received” two apartments in the same building, of joint value of 158.000 BAM. The price for these two apartments was allegedly paid out in cash, thus there is no paper trail nor bank transfers available as evidence. Besides all that, the local builder remained owner of the commercial real estate in question in the case, and the judge Majna Lovric, who presided over the case is in familial relationship with Ljerka Ostojic.
The fourth part of the series “A corporate-judicial affair in BiH” we published the text titled “Birds of a feather stick together” where we presented the actions of the Prosecution in Livno, as well as the Office of the Disciplinary Prosecutor of the HJPC, in relation to the complaints filed by the international bank. We observed the same methodology of rejecting the complaints both in the criminal and in the disciplinary sector. The methodology is based on a technique we named “avoidance of uncomfortable claims”. We also observed that the ODP unjustifiably delays the processing of the complaints. Its “silent phase” has lasted whole of 487 days. That is why we expressed doubt that the ODP will ever prosecute the judge Nina Ratkušić for disciplinary violations, for unjustifiably delaying the counter-enforcement order for more than 400 days.
In part five of the series “A corporate-judicial affair in BiH” we published a text titled “The Office of the Disciplinary Prosecutor of the HJCP as envisioned by Alena Kurpsahic Nadarevic”. In it, we presented the incredulous behaviour of the ODP, which failed to fulfil its official duties. We determined that the OPD is the institution responsible for creating the above-mentioned situation where the judges and prosecutors risk almost nothing when they behave unprofessionally. If the OPD is not doing its job, then that is the top priority problem within the judiciary. How can we expect the judicial community to promote honor and ethics, when the institution in charge of keeping wake over judicial ethics is not doing its job. We analysed reasons behind this by looking into the mistaken views of the person responsible for the Office of the Disciplinary Prosecutor.
The entire timeline of the delays, based on preside data from judicial documents, can be found in the first text, here.
We will continue to refer to the parties in the case by pseudonyms to avoid marketing. We shall refer to the party that the Court in Mostar favors “local builder” and the party that the Court discriminates “the international bank”.
♦♦♦
In this, part six of the series, we will present methods used to systematically minimize the possibility that the international bank can at least partly recover the losses it suffered as it had to act in accordance with illegal judgments by the Municipal and Cantonal courts in Mostar. That systematic action is two-fold. On the one hand, the local builder continuously decreases assets that are in its name, which the international bank could use to recover some of its sustained losses. On the other hand, the persistent delays or outright refusal to execute processes under the courts’, the prosecutor, and the ODP’s jurisdiction, all of which would make it more likely that some of the losses can be recovered.
In this text, we present only one of the models of decreasing the assets belonging to the local builder. The method used is the distribution of the monetary property of the local builder. This means that all who participated also directly cause additional damage to the international bank, by preventing recovery of its losses in this case.
♦♦♦
The Municipal court in Mostar, on January 15, 2016, reached a judgment in first-instance in favor of the local builder. The Cantonal court in Mostar on 1.6.2016. confirmed the judgment in the record 4.5 months long process. Finally, on 13.07.2016. the international bank had to pay local builder several millions BAM in damages.
We have already written about the Supreme court of the FBiH, which on 05.10.2017. handed down a judgment in third-instance, in favor of the international bank. The Supreme court FBiH overturned the judgment in the second instance, and refused the request for appeal by the local builder as unfounded. This in turn means that the payment made by the international bank is unfounded as well, and the local builder had the obligation to refund the said payment to the international bank.
We also wrote about how in the last 26 months, the Municipal court in Mostar used various methods of delay and avoided fulfilling its legal obligation to implement an order for counter-enforcement by the international bank. In particular, we mentioned the judge Nina Ratkušić who had been holding the case files in her drawer without explanation, for more than 14 months. In fact, an explanation is clear: with every passing day that the bank did not collect any money from the local builder, damages to the international bank are rising, and the possibility of even partial recovery of its damages decreases exponentially. This in fact is the goal of the entire process.
Just how it is possible that a judge dares to break the law in such extreme manner, and how it is possible that nobody reacts, becomes easier to understand when we examine the enormous monetary amounts subject of the controversy between the international bank and the local builder.
In addition, there are numerous people and companies that have benefitted from money that the local builder seized with illegal court judgements. They have helped local builder decrease the property that the international bank can seize in order to recover at least some of the funds paid out to the local builder on the basis of illegal judgments.
♦♦♦
On 14.7.2016, the local builder gained several tens of millions of BAM by enforcing judgments that were later overturned. It is impossible for the average citizen to grasp such enormous amounts, as due to the poor economic situation in BiH, citizens on average can grasp the amounts up to 1,000BAM. To an average BIH citizen, several millions of BAM looks more like the speed of space ships in Star Wars movies, than an amount one individual can possibly pocket for himself.
Let us illustrate the amounts that the international bank is claiming against the local builder, as well as additional persons and companies. This is to show that it was no accident the illegal judgments were handed down, just like it was no accident that the counter-enforcement order is being unjustifiably delayed:
• 4.8.2016, loan to Enfants d.o.o. Mostar, Director Zdenko Zovko, amount 100.000,00 BAM;
• 17.08.2016., loan to Rozić Marinko, amount 500.000,00 BAM;
• 8.9.2016., loan GEO Maric d.o.o. Mostar, Director Ivan Maric, amount 150.000,00 BAM;
• 19.09.2016., loan Enfants d.o.o. Mostar, Director Zdenko Zovko, amount 67.000,00 BAM;
• 26.09.2016., loan to Rozić Monika, amount 140.000,00 BAM;
• 27.09.2016., loan to Rozić Tomislav, amount 200.000,00BAM;
• 27.09.2016., loan to TORO d.o.o., Director Tomislav Rozić, amount 1.000.000,00 BAM;
• 04.10.2016. loan to Rozić Marinko, amount 100.000,00 BAM;
• 18.10.2016. loan to Top Guard d.o.o., Director Vida Kundačina, amount 30.000,00BAM;
• 24.10.2016., loan to Vrljić Ilija, amount 150.000,00 BAM;
• 09.11.2016., loan to Rozić Tomislav, amount 37.000,00 BAM;
• 10.11.2016., loan to Rozić Marinko, amount 500.000,00 BAM;
• 24.11.2016. loan to SIP d.o.o., Director Pamela Ostojić Sušac, amount 40.000,00 BAM;
• 05.12.2016., loan to Rozić Marinko, amount 1.500.000,00 BAM;
• 08.12.2016., loan to GEO Marić d.o.o. Mostar, Director Ivan Marić, amount 50.000,00 BAM;
• 13.12.2016., loan Projektant d.o.o., Director Milenko Bilić, amount 150.000,00 BAM;
• 26.12.2016., loan to Jablanit d.o.o., Director Elma Bajramović, amount 80.000,00 BAM;
• 17.03.2017., loan to GEO Maric Mostar, Director Ivan Marić, amount 25.000,00 BAM.
In total, the above-mentioned amounts come to approximately 5.2 million BAM, which is only a fraction of the amount that the local builder owes the international bank.
♦♦♦
Local builder’s attorney, Mr. Zdravko Rajić, best described the situation in this case in his appellate answer. He stated that the international bank unjustifiably refers to its payment of multimillions in damages to the local builder as unjust enrichment. In his view, since the local builder was granted that amount in damages by the first- and second-instance Courts in Mostar, it follows that it is not unjust enrichment. Rather, it is legal and just enrichment.
Here the attorney Zdravko Rajić uttered a huge, but painful and sad truth. Namely, the local builder could not on his own rob the international bank, he could only suggest ways in which that could be done. The crux of the conspiracy lies in the coordinated action by the Municipal and Cantonal courts in Mostar, who facilitated this robbery. Without the complicity of the Court in Mostar, the local builder would be unable to implement his devious plan.
In his 18.12.2017 appellate answer, attorney Zdravko Rajić made another prophetic vision of this case, which unfortunately came true. Namely, he claimed that the interantional bank cannot seek repayment of the loans by the individuals mentioned. This is so in his view, because the bank does not have a status of a creditor, “especially if one takes into account that the claim is due” and “the international bank does not have an enforcement order, on which it would base its claim against the local builder.”
At the time he made this statement, only 2 months had passed since the FBIH Supreme court’s decision in favor of the international bank. At that time, nobody could even assume (except apparently the attorney Zdravko Rajić), that the Municipal court in Mostar will succeed in blocking the counter-enforcement order, which was based on the Supreme court’s decision in favor of the international bank, for such a long time.
Namely, as of the publication of this article (23.12.2019), the said counter-enforcement order has not yet been issued, after 26 months of process. Let us once again remember that the enforcement procedure in favor of the local builder was finalized in one month.
♦♦♦
The described case exposes the fact that the interests in preventing the international bank from recovering on its claims, caused by illegal judgments by the courts in Mostar, is not only in the interest of the local builder who unjustly enriched himself thereby. Rather, that interest is much broader, and it is probably not even imaginable how far it reaches.
All this, of course, would be subject to investigation and could be well researched and prosecuted if only it was in the disciplinary and criminal prosecutors’ interests to do the work they are paid to do, and if only they would recognize that their official duty by virtue of their position, is to act with the purpose of suppressing the risk of corruption and all types of unprofessional and neglectful behavior.
The mix of circumstances we report on here, combined with the enormous refusal on the part of the Courts, the prosecutors and the ODP to do anything professional with regard to this case, leads to the conclusion that the old saying “the golden key opens all doors” is in fact true.
Let us be reminded of how the local builder doubly enriched himself. He kept in his possession the retail and residential units for which he received damages from the international bank, and was able to put them on the market and sell them again. These propserty sales intensified in particular after the Supreme Court of FBiH on 05.10.2017. overturned the judgments which granted payment of damages. These actions were all in service of additionally decreasing assets that the international bank could use to at least partially pay back the claim it has based on the enforcement of illegal judgments by the Municipal and Cantonal courts in Mostar.
We will describe additional methods for decreasing the international bank’s possibility of recovering its claim in next parts of this series.
♦♦♦
In this manner, institutions in charge, with their actions and inactions, are destroying every possibility of economic development and opening of new jobs in BiH. This puts a stamp on an especially important issue of youth emigration from BiH to Germany and other European countries, in which such judicial manipulations are not possible, nor imaginable.
End of part 6.
We will publish the next part of the story on 30.12.2019.
*Net Consulting d.o.o. monitors and analyses business practices and processes, conflicting business relationships, administrative and judicial proceedings, and identifies irregularities that damage legitimate and legal business interests of clients. This text has been published with the consent of the damaged party in this case. Net Consulting d.o.o. has confirmed the veracity of all claims in the text by verifying the primary sources of documentation and other material evidence.
