The former President of the Council of the Agency for the Prevention of Corruption, Momčilo Radulović, has breached regulations by failing to submit precise and complete information regarding his wife’s income.

This conclusion was reached by the Agency for the Prevention of Corruption (ASK).

“It has been established that Momčilo Radulović, in his capacity as a public official, violated Article 25, paragraph 2 of the Law on the Prevention of Corruption due to the inaccurate and incomplete reporting of his wife’s income in the income and assets report for 2021,” states the decision from ASK.

The agency took action following a report from the Network for the Affirmation of the Non-Governmental Sector (MANS), which was prompted by an order from the Administrative Court last December.

Previously, the former ASK director Jelena Perović dismissed MANS’ initiative, leading the NGO to appeal to the Administrative Court.

“… Considering that Article 26, paragraph 1, item 3 of the Law requires that the Report must include data on the assets and income of both the public official and the members of the joint household, specifically the spouse, and given that the income of the public official’s spouse does not fall under the data referred to in Article 29 of the Law that are exempt from publication, the Agency concluded that the appointee was required to provide accurate and complete information in the Income and Assets Report for 2021 No. 02-02-4-3224 dated 24.03.2022. The appointee failed to fulfill this obligation; hence, the Agency found a violation of Article 25, paragraph 2 of the Law on the Prevention of Corruption, as prescribed by Article 23, paragraph 2 of the previous Law on the Prevention of Corruption,” the ASK decision elaborates.

During the inquiry, Radulović asserted that the claims in the report were baseless and that it was filled with incomplete information and “falsehoods that led to the misuse of state institutions by the applicant, which resulted in the commencement of this procedure.”

“Regarding his wife’s information, he stated that he submitted it in the only legally permissible manner, in accordance with international treaties ratified by our country, which are binding. The Agency could not accept these claims as they contradicted international standards and existing legal regulations. Consequently, they could not be substantiated with material legal evidence supporting the public official’s assertions,” according to the Agency’s decision.

News