„A perfect reflection“ of the Anti-Corruption Agency: Council member persecuting a whistleblower

During yesterday’s parliamentary debate on amendments to the Law on the Prevention of Corruption, MP Nikola Zirojević warned Justice Minister Bojan Božović about what he described as the brutal persecution of a whistleblower from the Montenegrin Electricity Transmission System (METS). The whistleblower’s protected status was revoked by the Administrative Court in proceedings where METS was represented by Mladen Tomović, a lawyer who also serves as a member and vice-president of the Council of the Agency for the Prevention of Corruption.

- What concerns me far more than the legislation itself is the actual state of the Agency for the Prevention of Corruption. How is it possible for a member of the Council, acting as a lawyer, to represent a state-owned company in proceedings against a whistleblower? Does anyone see a conflict of interest there? A man’s whistleblower status is revoked and a campaign is conducted against him. Does anyone find it problematic that this Council member earned more than €35,000 for representing this very company? Does anyone find it problematic that the same Council member, Mr. Mladen Tomović, charged €800 for legal services that were never provided? The case file contains no documents corresponding to the services for which he was paid. Unfortunately, this is a perfect reflection of Montenegro’s Agency for the Prevention of Corruption, which clearly does not serve its intended purpose but instead appears primarily focused on persecuting those deemed undesirable and those who hold different views. Ultimately, because of all this, Slovenian anti-corruption expert Drago Kos terminated his cooperation with the Agency. Is that not a sufficient warning of what is happening? If you do not believe me as an opposition MP, if you do not believe me as a representative of my political party, is Drago Kos’s message not enough - Zirojević asked members of the parliamentary majority and Minister Božović.

The ETV Portal has continuously followed the METS whistleblower case and reported on what it describes as his persecution, while Montenegrin institutions and the judiciary have failed to respond.

In January last year, the Administrative Court controversially revoked the whistleblower’s protected status. In March, he initiated whistleblower protection proceedings before the Basic Court in Podgorica. Although such proceedings are legally required to be handled urgently, more than fifteen months later the case has still not moved forward.

The whistleblower originally filed a report on 24 November 2021, raising suspicions of corruption. Since then, he claims to have faced disciplinary proceedings, demotion, and reassignment to a workplace isolated from his colleagues.

He was granted protected whistleblower status in May 2023 after disciplinary proceedings had been initiated against him by the company’s management. At the time, the Ageny's leadership effectively prevented METS executives from dismissing him.

However, following the appointment of a new Council and director, the whistleblower’s situation reportedly worsened.

Tomović, who served as METS’s lawyer, was elected to the Council, while his friend and client Dušan Drakić was appointed acting director in the summer of 2024.

Shortly after taking office, Drakić announced that the METS whistleblower case would be reviewed. However, the Administrative Court’s ruling arrived in January, eliminating the need for the Agency itself to revoke the whistleblower’s protection.

Meanwhile, Mladen Tomović, described by critics as a persecutor of the whistleblower, became a member of the working group tasked with drafting Montenegro’s new whistleblower protection law.

Minister Božović has not responded to questions submitted by the ETV Portal in April regarding how an individual accused of targeting a whistleblower became part of the team responsible for drafting key whistleblower protection legislation?!

The minister has also remained silent regarding multiple submissions sent by the whistleblower himself.

Neither the Ministry of Justice nor the prosecution service has responded to information uncovered by the whistleblower alleging that Tomović charged METS for two legal actions that were never performed, amounting to €800.

A member and vice-president of the Agency's Council, as well as a member of the National Council for the Fight Against Corruption, is accused of issuing false invoices.

According to reporting published in April, Tomović received a total of €35,286.63 from METS for legal work connected to proceedings against the whistleblower.

The whistleblower obtained records of these payments through a freedom of information request submitted via the application of the Network for Affirmation of the NGO Sector (MANS), but only after the NGO filed an appeal due to the administration’s failure to respond.

The appointment of the new director, Kristina Braletić, has also been questioned because of Tomović’s role in the process. Critics argue that he was in a conflict of interest and should have recused himself from voting. Tomović is reportedly both a friend and legal representative of Braletić and represented her in proceedings against the Agency. Without his vote, she would not have secured the number of votes required for appointment.

Following Braletić’s election, international anti-corruption expert Drago Kos told the ETV Portal that the events at the Council session represented „the worst image the Council could possibly present of itself“, adding that he was definitively ending his years-long cooperation with the institution.