All the litigations are still being monitored by European Commission

I have filed four demands for audit to the Supreme Court of Cassation, and at the end of August I also demanded from the civilian section to take a unified stance on the contentious legal issues in the cases. I demanded that in order to eliminate any possibility of complaining that the law is applied in one way when the state or local authorities are involved in the litigation,and in a totally different way when they are not involved.

In all these four cases there is the obligation of the City of Novi Sad to regulate the intercity and international bus traffic from the new bus station, since it is their obligation in accordance with the Contract, as well as the damage compensation because the failure of the City of Novi Sad to do that caused bankruptcy of ATP Vojvodina Company whose majority owner I used to be.

I have not got the information if the demand has been accepted, but it has been announced on the portal that one of the cases was deliberated on 3 September, the other two on 11 September, while the fourth one relating the damage compensation is still waiting to be deliberated. It is also still unknown if the cases were presented at the civilian section session or only at the council session, meaning that there is not guarantee for a unified stance I demanded.

It is indicative that the President of the civilian section, Branko Stanić, was the rapporteur in the first deliberated case, and before that he had been the judge in charge according to the complaint of JGSP Novi Sad against its founder – the City of Novi Sad. The complaint was filed because of the alleged damage which the City could have caused to the Company according to the Contract with ATP Vojvodina.The complaint was solved in favour of JGSP Novi Sad, and it appeared after the advice given by the „commission“ formed by the City. The commission was composed out of a group of citizens-members of the City companies’ steering committees and institutions. Their engagement was paid from the City budget.

The Stanić’s judgement in favour of JGSP Novi Sad is still disputable, because it was in accordance with the City Urban Plan that the old bus station should have been moved to the location of ATP Vojvodina.

Let me remind you that in late August 2012 the EU Delegation visited Jugoremedija and, together with me, ATP Vojvodina, as two biggest cases from the list of 24 compromized privatizations. My case was defined as the only one where I as an investor but not the state suffers the damage, and that is why this case together witl all the other accompanying court cases is under constant monitoring of the European Commission. However, instead of investigating the role of the local authorities and some „business“ circles in blockade of the new investment, the investigation was turned to the opposite direction. They tried to make me a criminal. I was arrested two times – once because I did not appear at the court because of illness. In fact, it had been planned to finalize the bankruptcy process and the process of taking my property away during my 60-day-long detention. There is something very interesting here – activities of the institutions are unrealistically syncronized, so the decisions made in relation with the bankruptcy also overrun to the decisions on the damage compensation which are being processed by the Supreme Court of Cassation.

Sincerely Yours,

Ilija Dević, Investor of ATP Vojvodina Company

Izgled preduzeća ATP "Vojvodina" 

pre privatizacije


Izgled preduzeća ATP "Vojvodina" 

posle privatizacije


Joomla templates by Joomlashine