A criminal complaint has been filed against the director of Privatization Agency of Central Bosnia Canton Željko Radoš and director of the company Ozon d.d. Travnik, Enes Konjalić under suspicion that the crimes of abuse of office and willful misconduct were committed, resulting in multimillion damage, learns InfoRadar.
The criminal complaint that was filed with the Prosecutor’s Office of Central Bosnia Canton, Federation Police Administration and Ministry of Interior of Central Bosnia Canton
The complaint was submitted to the Federation Police Administration, Ministry of Interior and Prosecutor’s office of Central Bosnia Canton. The prosecutor’s office confirmed to have received the complaint on February 13, 2024.
– A case has been opened by Prosecutor’s office and the investigating prosecutor has ordered undertaking of actions by the Federation Police Administration in Sarajevo aimed at verification of allegations in the complaint, explained the Prosecutor’s Office of Central Bosnia Canton for InfoRadar.
The claim refers to July 2010 when the Privatization Agency of Central Bosnia Canton sold the Sports and recreation center Vlašić to the company Ozon from Travnik. A lawyer from Travnik, Adil Lozo, represents several families that believe to be damaged in this case.
The privatization of the tourist center in Vlašić lasted for two years, with the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina owning one hundred percent of the capital, estimated at BAM 5.1 million. Offers for the Vlašić Sports and Recreation Center were then submitted by Ozon and Tobacco Factory Sarajevo, and the competent commission declared Ozon’s offer to be of better quality.
The applicants of the criminal complaint argue that the contract and its annexes are void and illegal. Along with the application, a series of evidence was submitted which, according to the applicants, substantiate all their allegations.
– The seller sold the state capital of SRC Vlašić to the buyer, which also includes real estate belonging to third partiesunrelated to the privatization and assets of SRC Vlašić d.o.o. According to the criminal complaint obtained by InfoRadar, these third parties never had any connection to Travnik
Lawyer Lozo: We want to determine what is legal and what is unlawful
The attorney from Travnik highlights that the Agency “did not have the authority to carry out such a sale”.
– They went beyond the scope of authorization given by the Municipal Council and exceeded the boundaries outlined in the Privatization Act, and made documents that are illegal. Their actions have resulted in multimillion damage to the state, and we are determined to gather evidence to ensure that the case is thoroughly investigated to distinguish between what is legal and what is not. Everything appears shrouded in mystery and is being cloaked under the guise of higher economic and tourism development interests, but in reality, it amounts to theft. We acknowledge the importance of tourism and business, but we must also draw a clear distinction between legitimate business activities and unlawful actions…That is my goal, emphasized Lozo.
He highlights that members of the Teskeredžić family has a “legal interest” in the entirety of the situation, noting that the 270.000 square meter land complex includes existing infrastructure such as sewage and water supply systems.
– There is a reservoir on the land, and buyers have purchased plots and they are now collecting fees for utility services from them. We have done what should have been done by the state. Namely, the Municipal General Attorney’s Officeshould have initiated proceedings, given that in 2008, the Municipal Council made a decision to sell the land by auction. I have all the documentation from the Municipal Council’s session, including minutes and decisions, and this material has been forwarded to the Prosecutor’s Office and the Federation Police Administration because we have confidence in that police agency. An illegal sale has taken place. Additionally, the issue of compensation, which is minor compared to the overall value of the capital, is crucial. The question arises regarding what was included in the initial balance sheet and what was the subject of privatization or confiscation of state property privately owned with minimal compensation, adds Lozo. He asserts that a larger volume of assets was registered than what was shown in the opening balance sheet.
– With the annexes to the basic contract, they attempted to establish private ownership through privatization. The individuals from the Ozon Company believed that they had acquired the entirety of Vlašić for BAM 500.000 and the state did not intervene until now. A lawsuit has been initiated in the Municipal Court to establish the absolute nullity of the privatization contract on the grounds that established court practice dictates that public goods such as water supply, sewerage, parks, roads, and forests cannot be the subject of privatization…, emphasized Lozo.
He emphasizes that it remains unclear why the Agency acted in contradiction to the decisions of SRC Vlašić d.o.o. Travnik and the decisions of the Travnik Municipal Council. Specifically, why the privatization was conducted through direct negotiation at a significantly lower price compared to the value of the state capital, and why property representing a public good was privatized. The criminal complaints reads that “in September 2010, the Agency passed a decision approving the registration of the completed privatization in the court register, and subsequently issued several certificates regarding the payment of the price, fulfillment of contractual obligations, the soccer field, and other real estate”.
The applicants emphasize that the certificates from August 2019 and May 2020 are particularly contentious. These certificates confirmed that the total capital’s value included real estate, some of which were owned by multiple familiesnot involved in the privatization program of SRC Vlašić d.o.o. Travnik and its assets.
– It’s crucial to emphasize that during the privatization process, capital was acquired, not real estate. Privatization served as the foundation for registration in the court register of business entities, not in the land register or cadastral register. However, it appears that the contracting parties disregarded and misused this distinction, reads the complaint.
As further stated, the Agency lacked the authority or justification to issue these certificates and identify real estate contrary to the privatization program and the basic contract.
Three cases were initiated against Radoš in the previous period, as confirmed by the Prosecutor’s Office of Central Bosnia Canton. In two cases, an order was issued to suspend the investigation, while in one case, an order was issued not to conduct the investigation
The head of the Privatization Agency of Central Bosnia Canton, who has held this position continuously for 19 years, stated that he was present at the premises of the Federation Police Administration in Travnik on March 19 of this year as a witness.
– I am acquainted with the mentioned complaint, and I am fully informed about this case. I am not considered a suspect, and I am currently awaiting a decision on whether the Prosecutor’s Office file an indictment or not, said Željko Radoš for InfoRadar.
He highlights that he is aware of the reasons behind lawyer Lozo’s filing of the criminal complaint.
– He loses all disputes related to the Teskeredžić family, so he is grasping at any opportunity available. As far as this matter is concerned, I am at ease. Simultaneously, civil proceeding is underway regarding the claim of the Teskeredžić family, and there will be a hearing on May 27th. This proceeding is nearly identical in content to the current complaint, aiming to annul the basic contract from 2010 and all its annexes. The civil proceeding focus on refuting the contract from 2010 and five annexes to the contract. I will likely serve as a witness there, says Radoš.
The head of the Privatization Agency asserts that the agency does not determine the ownership of real estate, emphasizing that the subject of the sale was 100 percent state capital.
– Before the decision to sell was made, it was deliberated at the Municipal Council Travnik, which explored all options. It was a standard sale process, involving two bidders, and a contract was ultimately concluded with Ozon, as Tobacco Factory Sarajevo withdrew, explains Radoš, who believes that the privatization was conducted in accordance with regulations. He is confident that the lawsuit will be dismissed.
Radoš alleges that everything was conducted in compliance with regulations. He further asserts that members of the Teskeredžić family were unlawfully registered as owners in the land register in 2008.
– When they received the land register extracts, they attempted to falsely accuse the Agency of selling a public good, alleging that we sold water supply and sewerage system, which is untrue because it was resolved through a concession?! explains Radoš.
The legal representative of the Ozon Company and its director, Enes Konjalić, attorney Faik Muhić, informed InfoRadar that Konjalić provided a statement at the Travnik Police Station on March 19, 2024, as a witness. Muhić believes that the criminal complaint is entirely groundless and suspects that its objective is related to other motives.
– The complaint in question was initiated and submitted by the Law Office “Adil Lozo and others” d.o.o. Travnik, purportedly on behalf of their clients, the Teskeredžić family. However, it is noted that most members of this family have not resided in Bosnia and Herzegovina for decades, and it is questionable whether they are familiar with the details of this case. Consequently, doubts arise regarding the validity of the Power of Attorney authorizing the actions of this Law Office, as well as their underlying intentions. The complaint appears to have been submitted solely with the intention of intimidating the aforementioned companies, particularly Ozon z.d.d. and SRC Vlašić, in order to dissuade them from pursuing legal action aimed at annulling the procedure by which, in our opinion, Travnik Municipality returned the land of the former bey family Teskeredžić to their current heirs, states the Muhić law office.
They emphasize that the restitution covers over 280 dunams of land in the very center of the Babanovac Sports and Recreation Center. This land was utilized for the construction of numerous hotels, motels, private cottages, houses, and other commercial facilities. Additionally, it encompassed ski slopes, ski lifts, and various infrastructure facilities including access roads, sewerage systems, and city lighting
– The Municipality of Travnik returned the constructed land in question to the former owners of what were meadows and forests before without the Law on Restitution of Real Estate in BiH having been passed, meaning that, according to Ozon’s representatives, it has gifted state owned built land to private individuals. They highlight that the General Attorney’s Office of Central Bosnia Canton has sided with the plaintiff, Ozon and others, while Municipal General Attorney’s Office in Travnik sided with the Teskeredžić family.
– After the land, along with the ski lifts and ski slopes on Babanovac, was “returned”, the Teskeredžić family requested approximately BAM 2.6 million from the Ozon Company for the ski slope and ski lifts. They claimed that it is now their property and demanded that skiing activity be suspended until the issue of this fee is resolved. However, Ozon refused, disputing the legality of the process of acquiring ownership. At the same time, Ozon claimed that the privatization of the earlier company SRC Vlašić d.o.o. granted them a permanent right of easement over the ski slope. Ozon initiated a dispute regarding this matter and ultimately won a final decision in their favor, as stated by the Law Office Muhić and others.
– Teskeredžić family initiated the issue of privatization of SRC Vlašić after the Ozon Company initiated procedures to obtain a concession for the ski resorts on Babanovac, and after it requested an urban planning permit for the construction of new slopes and ski lifts (four-seater and three-seater), and after it began procedures to cancel the restitution of state land under the Vlašić Sports and Recreation Center to the Teskeredžić family, and after it filed a lawsuit to determine the true holder of the right of easement over ski slopes and ski lifts in Vlašić. The Ozon Company fulfilled all its contractual obligations without any dispute until it disrupted the legal position of the Teskeredžić family. According to representatives of the Ozon Company, they believe that “the entire case in question (the return of real estate on Vlašić to the Teskeredžić family) is a major criminal act directed by the then management of the Municipality of Travnik and the Teskeredžić family.” They assert that the state renounced and gifted the built SRC Vlašić to natural persons, who then proceeded to sell the land and buildings built on that land, said the Law Office Muhić, adding that instead of having the “state” which built the Center using the money of all taxpayers from Bosnia and Herzegovina, sell this land and collect construction rent, these actions were carried out by third parties whose ancestors once owned the land before World War II.
– In the event that it is found to be legal, the members of that family should have been compensated for those meadows and forests according to the market conditions of the time, instead of having the land returned to their ownership today with all built objects, said the Law Office Muhić and others.
