ATP Vojvodina is on the list of 24 compromised privatizations solving of which has been demanded by the European Commission in Brussels based on the report provided by the Anti-corruption Council. ATP Vojvodina has been specially emphasized among the first five, because it is the only case of privatization in which the investor Ilija Dević but not the state of Serbia suffers the damage.

In January 2013, immediately after coming of SPP (Serbian Progressive Party) to power, The Commercial Court of Appeal made the final and executive decision which did not postpone the execution; this decision would have completed the bankruptcy procedure in ATP Vojvodina and 500 employees would have been given back their jobs. The previous state security stands behind taking ATP Vojvodina away; it has been working for the narco and tobacco mafia, exerting the pressure through the politicians in Serbia. That was the way in which the pressure was put on the judiciary in case of ATP Vojvodina.

For such acting in the judiciary relating the case of ATP Vojvodina, the Anti-corruption Agency addressed that time First Deputy Prime Minister Aleksandar Vučić by sending him a letter , but there was no reply!

After filing the revision demand to the Supreme Court of Cassation, a decision was made within 24 days. The decision was till then unknown in the court practice, it was unlawful but its aim was to declare the contract null and void after ten years. (http://www.ilijadevic.com/ostala-dokumenta/09052013%20REVIZIJSKA%20ODLUKA%20VRHOVNOG%20KASACIONOG%20SUDA.pdf)

After that decision, the Anti-corruption Agency sent a letter to the Supreme Court of Cassation President, but there was no reply.

The Commercial Court in Novi Sad judges recently sent their statements through the judge Slobodanka Komšić (Jorgovanka Tabaković’s sister), and they had to give their statement in accordance with the Ministry of Justice demand after the complaints I had filed because of their problematic acting in four cases. (http://ilijadevic.com/images/ostalo/maj18/Izjasnjenje-PRIVREDNOG-SUDA-IZ-NOVOG-SADA.pdf)

The common thing in each and every statement given by the judges from the Commercial Court in Novi Sad being in charge of the cases is that they claim that nobody has exerted pressure on them and that they have made decisions in accordance with their own belief. Claiming this, all of them in a synchronized way have mentioned the decision made in 2013 by the Supreme Court of Cassation which had been made under a horrible political pressure. In this way they have sent the message to the second instance courts by which they should not make their decisions in accordance with the law but in accordance with the law practice, which is not the source of law!

The Supreme Court of Cassation made the decision in a flagrant and obvious way of arbitrarily determining the facts and, using the wrongly determined facts, applied the laws of the Republic of Serbia in a wrong way. The tone and the contents of the decision clearly show that this court was not independent and impartial because it obviously applied arbitrarily determined facts and implemented the law in an incorrect way. In its controversial decision Rev 58/2013, the Supreme Court of Cassation has said that I as an investor was provided with the monopolistic position, that the Contract was opposite to the compulsory regulations, laws and decisions of the City, the law order and good customs. The Court has not had the evidence for all the claims and that can be seen from the following facts:

1) The Supreme Court of Cassation has ignored the elements and facts that the Public City Transport Company from Novi Sad and the old bus station did not meet the legal requirements necessary for functioning of the intercity bus transportation, i.e. that they were not working in accordance with the law.

2) The Supreme Court of Cassation has ignored the fact that the Contract with the City of Novi Sad was signed after it had been adopted by the City of Novi Sad Assembly which had analyzed justification of signing such a contract. The Mayor of Novi Sad is not a singular body or an individual and the Contract was not signed in his/her name and in his/her own interest. The Contract was signed after obtaining the analysis of the City Public Companies, after obtaining the analysis made by the Public Company for Urbanism, after the consultations with the expert services of the City Assembly and after providing the opinion of the City Public Attorney whose task is generally to take care of the City property interests. It is not clear and it sounds impossible that both the City of Novi Sad and I myself were equally aware of signing an illegal subject of the Contract. The City of Novi Sad has the services which take care of the citizens’ interests, while I take care of the interest of my company and it was not my obligation to protect the interests of the City of Novi Sad.

3) Pursuant to the Article 14 of the Law on the Road Traffic, the Municipality and the City are those who determine the bus stations and locations used for transport of the passengers. It means that the City of Novi Sad was authorized to conclude the Contract and fulfill its obligations, because its only obligation was to replace the main intercity and international bus station in accordance with the General Urban Plan.

4) „Monopoly“is proved by the Law on the Competition Protection based on which the Commission for the competition protection has been formed. In case of violation and distortion of competition, a fine is imposed according to this Lex specialis. This law was adopted on 14 September 2005, so it was possible to consider it in case of the abovementioned signed Contract. There are about ten private bus stations in Serbia - almost in every town in Serbia. The prices of the bus services are defined by the Chamber of Commerce of Serbia. It is obvious that there are no elements of monopoly.

5) Claim of the Supreme Court of Cassation in which they express their concern because of the illegal attempt of the parties to change the type of the activity of the City Utility Company without the prescribed procedure is entirely unclear and incorrect because the activity of the City Utility Company station related the city and suburban public transport, while the new ATP Vojvodina a.d. Novi Sad bus station was intended for the intercity and international transport. Namely, if the City Public Transport Company had begun to deal with the international and intercity bus transport and services, the City of Novi Sad would have had to change the Founding Act. The Supreme Court of Cassation has concluded that the Public Transport Company would have been deprived of providing the bus station services, but the Court has not analyzed the fact that this company would not have been deprived of providing the bus station services in the city and suburban transport and that this company has never been registered for the intercity and international transport – which has been confirmed by the competent Ministry of Transport as well.

The above mentioned facts clearly show that the Supreme Court of Cassation’s decision was made under political and crime pressure in which the following persons participated: the prosecutor Djordje Ostojić, the prosecutor Snežana Marković, that time President of Serbia Tomislav Nikolić, the judge Stojan Jokić, Supreme Court of Cassation President Dragomir Milojević, Dušan Stupar in whose offices SPP is situated, and everything has been done in accordance with the approval given by that time First Deputy Prime Minister Aleksandar Vučić.

The Supreme Court of Cassation has made the decision in order for it to be followed by synchronized actions of other courts under political pressure; it is obviously an arbitrary decision made without the facts that are relevant for making such a decision; the laws in Serbia have been interpreted and implemented in a wrong way, so the decision is incompatible with the guarantees of the rights provided by the European Convention on the Human Rights and fundamental freedoms of the citizens.

Justified complaints have been sent to the Second Instance Courts:

1. The proceedings at the Commercial Court of Appeal in Belgrade, the judge rapporteur Milanović Ljiljana (the damage in the amount of 91 million Euros calculated by the court experts)

http://ilijadevic.com/images/ostalo/mar18/21-12-2017-s.pdf (COMPLAINT)

2. The proceedings at the Commercial Court of Appeal, the council not determined yet (the damage in the amount of 36 million Euros calculated by the court experts)

http://ilijadevic.com/images/ostalo/mar18/27-02-2018-s.pdf (COMPLAINT)

3. The proceedings at the Court of Appeal in Novi Sad, (the damage in the amount of 132 million Euros calculated by the court experts)

http://www.ilijadevic.com/images/ostalo/feb18/13122018.pdf (COMPLAINT)

The judge rapporteur Dušica Šalić, the Council members Verica Bajić and Jasminka Dimić.

In an accelerated procedure, the service life has been extended for the judge Novica Peković, current President of the Court of Appeal in Novi Sad, who has a special task in this case.

I have presented exclusively the facts here, but if you visit the site www.ilijadevic.com you can have the insight into the entire documentation. My aim is not to put the pressure on the judiciary, but I just want to tell the truth and only the truth in defence of my funds which I, as one of a few in Serbia, have earned myself, and which I have been defending for a decade against the narco and tobacco mafia which is governing Serbia.