Centre for Civic Education (CCE) welcomes the publicly expressed readiness of the Director of the Agency for Prevention of Corruption (APC), Kristina Braletić, to take positions that point to threats to the public interest and the possible existence of corruption, particularly in relation to the legal restrictions on attorneys representing legal entities. However, CCE notes that such an approach by APC has, so far, not been consistent.
CCE expects the recently appointed Director of APC to act efficiently, in a principled manner, and equally in relation to all cases, particularly bearing in mind that she has been part of this institution for years and is well acquainted with its most complex cases. Despite this, Braletić has not responded either to CCE’s follow-up requests or to the Initiative submitted in October 2024, which requested the determination of a conflict of interest involving APC Council member Mladen Tomović.
It is a devastating fact that, even after more than a year, APC has still not issued a decision in the case of its own Council member, Mladen Tomović, who, as an attorney, represented the legal entity CGES in proceedings against a whistleblower, despite the restrictions prescribed by Article 16 of the Law on the Prevention of Corruption. This concerns a whistleblower to whom APC had previously granted protection due to the reported threat to the public interest.
Additionally, according to available information, the whistleblower’s protection was later challenged through court proceedings in which Tomović himself participated, while APC failed to take steps, in accordance with the Supreme Court’s decision, to return the case to a state that would enable lawful and impartial proceedings.
This case has also been recognized by international experts as a problematic issue of conflict of interest within APC itself. The absence of a decision strengthens suspicions of biased and selective conduct, while also undermining the credibility of an institution that should be a leading force in the fight against corruption, but which is unable to address such cases within its own ranks.
Such treatment of one of the most significant whistleblower protection cases sends a discouraging message to all citizens who are considering reporting corruption. At the same time, it calls into question APC’s public messages that those who report corruption are adequately protected and that institutions act professionally and impartially. For this reason, it is difficult to speak of strengthening public trust in the whistleblower protection system and the fight against corruption.
CCE expects Director Braletić to demonstrate readiness to act without exception in all cases, including those relating to possible unlawful conduct within APC itself. Only the consistent application of the law and equal treatment of all cases can contribute to restoring public trust in an institution that should be a key pillar of the fight against corruption.
Snežana Kaluđerović, Senior Legal Advisor