<article>Zoran Bećirović napustio je danas zatvor u Spužu.On je tamo odslužio kaznu od godinu zatvora, zbog nasilništva nad novinarkom Pobjede Anom Raičković i članovima njene familije 10. novembra prošle godine ispred restorana "Gurman“ u podgoričkom naselju Blok pet.Da je Bećirović izašao iz zatvora, objavila je Pobjeda.Podsjetimo, prethodno je kaznu odslužio i njegov tjelohranitelj Mladen Mijatović, koji je takođe učestvovao u incidentu.Uz to, Bećirovićev sin Luka bio je osuđen na uslovnu kaznu, koja je istekla ranije tokom godine.</article>

Zoran Bećirović napustio je danas zatvor u Spužu.
On je tamo odslužio kaznu od godinu zatvora, zbog nasilništva nad novinarkom Pobjede Anom Raičković i članovima njene familije 10. novembra prošle godine ispred restorana "Gurman“ u podgoričkom naselju Blok pet.
Da je Bećirović izašao iz zatvora, objavila je Pobjeda.
Podsjetimo, prethodno je kaznu odslužio i njegov tjelohranitelj Mladen Mijatović, koji je takođe učestvovao u incidentu.
Uz to, Bećirovićev sin Luka bio je osuđen na uslovnu kaznu, koja je istekla ranije tokom godine.

Portal ETV

original

viewImage

baseImage

610x380

500x500

400x240

400x203

1250x600

1084x550

thumbnail

Zoran Bećirović

odslužio kaznu

Hronika

Bećirović izašao iz zatvora

While finishing his speech before journalists, satisfied with the conviction of Vesna and Miloš Medenica, Special Prosecutor Vukas Radonjić was still taken aback when an ETV journalist tried to ask him about the manipulation of Sky messages. ESCAPE FROM ANSWERS „Can you tell us about the 12 sentences from Sky…“ The journalist didn’t finish the sentence, as Radonjić shook his head, turned his back, and quickly walked away.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-etv/swp/8p72gy/media/20260129200124_6e7b6a160fbddd41d553e9db50c179ecbdb3098a746327f992a38cb970b9b07a.png" data-media-id="editor_0" data-image-id="20260129200124_6e7b6a160fbddd41d553e9db50c179ecbdb3098a746327f992a38cb970b9b07a" data-rendition-name="original" width="1607" height="1080" loading="lazy" alt="BIJEG OD MIKROFONA TELEVIZIJE E: Vukas Radonjić, portparol SDT-a"> <figcaption>BIJEG OD MIKROFONA TELEVIZIJE E: Vukas Radonjić, portparol SDT-a(Photo: Screenshot)</figcaption> </figure>  Obviously, as soon as he heard the number 12, the spokesperson of the Special Prosecutor’s Office knew that he should avoid the Television E journalist. As everyone in the Special State Prosecutor’s Office is avoiding answering questions from our media outlet for days about possible prosecutorial abuses in the case of investigations and indictments against Podgorica businessman Aleksandar Mijajlović. In several investigative reports, the journalistic team of Television E revealed that special prosecutors used identical 12 sentences in three prosecutorial acts and two investigations - cocaine smuggling and cigarette trafficking from Ecuador. Comparative analysis also revealed that special prosecutors or investigators from the Special Police Department arbitrarily changed nicknames, that is, the identities of people who conducted Sky correspondence. At the same time, the investigation showed that the Europol intelligence document was altered to redirect the indictment toward Podgorica businessman Mijajlović, as well as some other people targeted by the SSPO.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-etv/swp/8p72gy/media/20260129200124_6120558838fd76719360dfc9bd8f5919f72332f5087e2e46e58c8955174cf098.png" data-media-id="editor_1" data-image-id="20260129200124_6120558838fd76719360dfc9bd8f5919f72332f5087e2e46e58c8955174cf098" data-rendition-name="original" width="1600" height="1200" loading="lazy" alt="DOKAZI TUŽILAČKE MANIPULACIJE: Iste rečenice u različitim predmetima "> <figcaption>DOKAZI TUŽILAČKE MANIPULACIJE: Iste rečenice u različitim predmetima(Photo: Portal ETV )</figcaption> </figure>  The prosecutorial silence in response to official inquiries from ETV and the avoidance of direct questions further raises suspicion that there were manipulations of Sky messages, and thus an abuse of official authority. JANJUŠEVIĆ: THE SSPO MUST EXPLAIN -I think the Special State Prosecutor’s Office must answer these questions and state in its announcement whether the claims of the journalistic investigation are true and, if they are not true, explain how they appeared both in the Order to Conduct the Investigation and in another indictment. Also, why are illogicalities, errors, and omissions - said security analyst and former assistant director of the police, Nikola Janjušević.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-etv/swp/8p72gy/media/20260129200128_d352c4f501dbb24f2494331c751067a51baaff3fb5606a06bfc8cc75cb44e227.png" data-media-id="editor_2" data-image-id="20260129200128_d352c4f501dbb24f2494331c751067a51baaff3fb5606a06bfc8cc75cb44e227" data-rendition-name="original" width="1060" height="526" loading="lazy" alt="UPOZORENJA BEZ EFEKTA: Nikola Janjušević, bivši pomoćnik direktora policije "> <figcaption>UPOZORENJA BEZ EFEKTA: Nikola Janjušević, bivši pomoćnik direktora policije(Photo: Portal ETV)</figcaption> </figure>  It cannot be ruled out that, in this specific case it is not about mistakes but about a clear motive of special prosecutors – that in cases where they do not have solid evidence against persons they label as organizers of criminal groups, they are ready to create evidence themselves by altering existing ones, just as they did in the cases against businessman Aleksandar Mijajlović. Janjušević notes that ETV, in its investigative series, precisely explained how the same 12 Sky messages were repeated in different indictments. - All of this can be an oversight, a mistake, but it can also be - intent. It is definitely impossible to connect two different cases in this way, Sky communication about cocaine smuggling from Ecuador, and identical Sky communication related to cocaine smuggling, also from Ecuador - says Janjušević.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-etv/swp/8p72gy/media/20260129200136_02cfdbcb2f8183aa0ae53df12252ba3bc4f8db476897e836303a1f53e8c8fe9c.jpg" data-media-id="editor_3" data-image-id="20260129200136_02cfdbcb2f8183aa0ae53df12252ba3bc4f8db476897e836303a1f53e8c8fe9c" data-rendition-name="original" width="835" height="576" loading="lazy" alt="KO JE ODGOVORAN: Zgrada Specijalnog državnog tužilaštva "> <figcaption>KO JE ODGOVORAN: Zgrada Specijalnog državnog tužilaštva(Photo: UGC )</figcaption> </figure>  REPETITION OF INSERTED SKY MESSAGES Lawyer Marko Radović notes that, based on his experience, this is not the first time that the same messages have appeared in different cases. - It is known to me, as a defense lawyer in numerous cases where indictments are based on Sky material that - similar things happen. I cannot say identical, but I am the defense counsel of a defendant who experienced a situation where the same messages – not the same set of messages, but literally the same two messages – were used as evidence for four criminal offenses in two criminal proceedings - Radović emphasizes. He notes that in another case, when the indictment was under review, he tried to problematize the issue of identical Sky messages in different cases – but without results. PROSECUTORIAL COUNCIL AND SUPREME COURT WITHOUT COMMENT In response to an inquiry from Television E, the Prosecutorial Council briefly stated that they do not deal with reviewing prosecutorial work in that way. They emphasized that, we quote, “they derive their powers through mechanisms of disciplinary and ethical responsibility, as well as giving opinions on complaints about the work of state prosecutors.” The Supreme Court also did not feel the need to reconsider the decision to extend Mijajlović’s detention, based on an indictment in which Sky messages from another prosecutorial case were inserted. ETV informed EUROPOL about the conduct of special prosecutors, but this police organization told us that it is not within their jurisdiction to comment on possible abuses of operational data. RADOVIĆ: RESPONSIBILITY OF JUDGES Legal experts remind that prosecutors, just like lawyers, are only a party in the proceedings and that in such cases responsibility also lies with the judges of the High Court, who, according to them, too easily confirm even disputed indictments.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-etv/swp/8p72gy/media/20260129200132_7b3a101ec0101cc16cada61b40e75665e9fa9f6cc9dd8abb3b1b9aafad988df5.png" data-media-id="editor_4" data-image-id="20260129200132_7b3a101ec0101cc16cada61b40e75665e9fa9f6cc9dd8abb3b1b9aafad988df5" data-rendition-name="original" width="1033" height="564" loading="lazy" alt="DA LI SUDIJE DETALJNO ČITAJU OPTUŽNICE PRIJE POTVRĐIVANJA: Advokat, Marko Radović "> <figcaption>DA LI SUDIJE DETALJNO ČITAJU OPTUŽNICE PRIJE POTVRĐIVANJA: Advokat, Marko Radović(Photo: Portal ETV )</figcaption> </figure>  - I see the problem precisely in the fact that the court, through its conduct, in a sense affirms such conduct of the prosecution. The problem is that until the trial, that is, the presentation of Sky material as evidence at the main hearing, you literally have a situation where courts almost do not read that communication, accepting everything that the prosecution states as evidence derived from Sky?! Detentions are ordered, reasonable suspicion is accepted both in the procedure of ordering and later in the procedure of extending detention - Radović points out. Janjušević also emphasizes that judicial confirmation is of the greatest importance for the credibility of the process. - Confirmation of an indictment is a very important institution in criminal law. So far, it has been done lightly in some cases. I hope that in the coming period judges will read indictments much more seriously, if we want the rule of law and fair proceedings - Janjušević concludes. However, questions of responsibility – or rather irresponsibility – will, it seems, continue to be raised only by journalists, independent lawyers, and independent experts, because this case is just another confirmation that functions and positions are more important than the rule of law and respect for human rights and freedoms. The ETV team will continue to investigate and publish evidence that may, perhaps, help them to see clearly.

State „omertà“ over prosecutorial manipulation of Sky messages

Glumac Đorđije Tatić ove subote je gost u astropsihološkom talk show programu Znak Podznak.

Emisiju možete pratiti subotom u 22 sata na Televiziji E.
<div class="embed-block"><div><div style="left: 0; width: 100%; height: 0; position: relative; padding-bottom: 56.25%;"><iframe src="https://cdn.iframe.ly/api/iframe?url=https%3A%2F%2Fyoutu.be%2FC50K7InjD7k&amp;key=87ca3314a9fa775b5c3a7726100694b0" style="top: 0; left: 0; width: 100%; height: 100%; position: absolute; border: 0;" allowfullscreen scrolling="no" allow="accelerometer *; clipboard-write *; encrypted-media *; gyroscope *; picture-in-picture *; web-share *;"></iframe></div></div></div>

Znak podznak: Gost Đorđije Tatić

Ustavni sud Crne Gore ukinuo je presudu Vrhovnog suda iz februara 2023. godine u predmetu bivše viceguvernerke Irene Radović utvrdivši da joj u postupcima pred redovnim sudovima za mobing nije pružena djelotvorna sudska zaštita, u skladu sa standardima Evropskog suda za ljudska prava. Predmet je vraćen Vrhovnom sudu na ponovno odlučivanje.
Osnovni i Viši sud u Podgorici, a potom i Vrhovni sud, presudili su da Radović nije učinila vjerovatnim da je od oktobra 2017. do jula 2018. godine, bila zlostavljana na radu, odnosno da je prema njoj diskriminatorski postupano jer je žena. Ustavni sud je ocijenio da sudovi, prilikom utvrđenja postojanja mobinga i diskriminacije nijesu na adekvatan način cijenili nalaz i mišljenje neuropsihijatra, koji je utvrdio da je Radović usljed konfliktnih odnosa na radnom mjestu, bila liječena i ispoljavala simptome posttraumatskog stresnog poremećaja.
- Takav nalaz je obavezivao sudove da ispitaju da li su konkretne radnje posmatrane pojedinačno i u zbiru mogle predstavljati zadiranje u psihički integritet Radović bez obzira na to da li bi svaka od tih radnji, sagledana izolovano, formalno bila dopuštena - navodi se u odluci Ustavnog suda.
U odluci Ustavnog suda se dalje navodi da je izostala suštinska analiza činjenica da su diskreciona ovlašćenja tadašnjeg guvernera primjenjivana selektivno, jer su nadležnosti kontinuirano smanjivane samo Radović dok prema drugoj dvojici viceguvernera takve mjere nijesu preduzimane.
Za Ustavni sud je sporno i to što redovni sudovi nijesu adekvatno cijenili činjenicu da je Centralna banka protiv Radović podnijela krivičnu prijavu nakon što se ona žalila na mobing. Iako je prijava kasnije odbačena, sudovi nijesu razmotrili da li je takvo postupanje poslodavca moglo imati negativan efekat na njen profesionalni ugled.
Takođe, u postupku utvrđenja mobinga sudovi nijesu cijenili ni činjenicu da je Radović smijenjena prije isteka mandata i u toku sudskog postupka za zaštitu od mobinga.
Vijeće Ustavnog suda je ukazalo da je suprotno praksi Evropskog suda i to što sudovi nijesu adekvatno cijenili dokument kojim je Radović optužena za nemoralno ponašanje, odnosno sveli su ovo na pitanje da li je formalno distribuiran među zaposlenima, bez razmatranja sadržine informacije kojom se zadire u privatni život.
- Sudovi su bili dužni da razmotre cjelokupni činjenični i pravni kontekst predmeta i da sagledaju kumulativni efekat svih prethodno navedenih okolnosti, uključujući i pokretanje krivičnog postupka, koje su u konkretnom slučaju rezultirale razrješenjem podnositeljke sa javne funkcije. Propuštanjem takve sveobuhvatne analize, sudovi nijesu ocijenili posljedice koje su navedene okolnosti imale na profesionalni ugled, lično dostojanstvo i psihički integritet podnositeljke - naveli su u Ustavnom sudu.
Ustavni sud je naglasio i da ovom odlukom ne prejudicira ishod ponovnog postupka o tome da li su događaji na radnom mjestu zaista predstavljali mobing, ali da način na koji su sudovi sagledali te događaje ne ispunjava standarde djelotvorne zaštita u smislu prakse i standarda Evropskog suda za ljudska prava, zbog čega je bilo nužno ukinuti osporenu presudu i predmet vratiti na ponovno odlučivanje Vrhovnom sudu.&nbsp;

Ustavni sud ukinuo presudu Vrhovnog: Radović nije pružena djelotvorna sudska zaštita

Ruska naftna kompanija Lukoil pristala je da proda većinu svoje strane imovine, ukupne vrijednosti oko 22 milijarde dolara, američkoj privatnoj investicionoj kompaniji Carlyle Group, uz odobrenje američke vlade.
Lukoil je saopštio da je sa Carlyle-om postigao dogovor o prodaji svoje jedinice Lukoil International GmbH, koja upravlja imovinom kompanije u inostranstvu, prenosi Capital.ba.
- Potpisani sporazum nije ekskluzivan za kompaniju i podliježe određenim prethodnim uslovima kao što je pribavljanje neophodnih regulatornih odobrenja, uključujući dozvolu Kancelarije za kontrolu strane imovine (OFAC) Ministarstva finansija Sjedinjenih Američkih Država (SAD) za transakciju sa Carlyle-om - saopštio je Lukoil.
Sporazum ne uključuje imovinu u Kazahstanu, koja će ostati vlasništvo ruske naftne kompanije. Analitičari procjenjuju ukupnu stranu imovinu Lukoila na oko 22 milijarde dolara.
Nakon uvođenja sankcija SAD i Velike Britanije 15. oktobra, Lukoil je objavio namjeru da proda svoju stranu imovinu.
Lukoil je uključen u projekte u Azerbejdžanu, Kazahstanu, Uzbekistanu, Iraku, Egiptu, Kamerunu, Nigeriji, Gani, Meksiku, Ujedinjenim Arapskim Emiratima i Republici Kongo. Kompanija posjeduje rafinerije u Bugarskoj, Rumuniji i Holandiji, kao i mrežu od približno 2,5 hiljada benzinskih stanica u 19 zemalja.&nbsp;

Lukoil prodao glavninu imovine američkoj kompaniji

Leković pripojio Šćepanovića Demokratama

Politika

Grozev: Ruski agenti koji su učestvovali u pokušaju terorizma u Crnoj Gori danas vrbuju nove agente, Šišmakov zadužen za srpske univerzitete

Zogović: Vukićević i ja sjutra podnosimo ostavke

SDT oduzelo predmet cetinjskom sudu uoči završnih riječi; Đukanović: Tužilaštvo mora imati visok nivo poštovanja prema porodicama žrtava

Bećirović izašao iz zatvora

Tagovi

State „omertà“ over prosecutorial manipulation of Sky messages

Znak podznak: Gost Đorđije Tatić

Ustavni sud ukinuo presudu Vrhovnog: Radović nije pružena djelotvorna sudska zaštita

Lukoil prodao glavninu imovine američkoj kompaniji

Programska šema

PRATITE TVe UŽIVO