The Special State Prosecutor’s Office (SDT) did not damage the reputation and honor of Ana Pešukić from Nikšić, who is accused of stealing jewelry and gold from Aco Đukanović’s residence. Consequently, the state is not obligated to compensate her the requested amount of 10,000 euros, as ruled by the Podgorica Higher Court.

This court dismissed Pešukić’s appeal against the Podgorica Basic Court’s ruling, which declared her request for compensation for non-pecuniary damage—an infringement of her personal rights, honor, and reputation—as unfounded.

Pešukić is currently facing charges from the Basic State Prosecutor’s Office (ODT) for allegedly stealing jewelry and gold valued over 300,000 euros from the home of former President Milo Đukanović’s brother. She filed a lawsuit against the SDT, arguing that there was no public interest in the special prosecutors disclosing information about the investigation during a press conference held on October 15, 2020, asserting that “information about thefts in Montenegro has never been presented in such a manner.”

In her appeal to the Higher Court, she noted that it was evident the actions were aimed at discrediting and harming her, given that her alleged victim was the brother of the state president.

Pešukić was arrested on April 2, 2020, after confessing to stealing jewelry from her employer’s home, while disputing the total value specified in the charges against her.

The case was subsequently transferred from the Podgorica ODT to the SDT, where retired special prosecutor Stojanka Radović filed an indictment in October 2020. The indictment alleged that Pešukić was part of an organized criminal group led by RF, who had incited her to exploit the trust of the Đukanović family and steal a significant quantity of valuables from their apartment.

Upon reviewing the indictment, the High Court acquitted RF and Pešukić of the charges related to forming a criminal organization. It did uphold parts of the indictment concerning aggravated theft, aggravated theft by incitement, and abuse of official duties in business transactions.

The theft case involving the Đukanović residence was referred to the Basic Court in Podgorica in late 2023, following the special division of the Podgorica High Court’s declaration of incompetence.

In her appeal to the Higher Court, Pešukić expressed confusion over the first instance court’s conclusion that a causal link did not exist between her submission of medical documentation pertaining to the mental distress she experienced due to the SDT’s actions.

She argued that the Basic Court, in its initial verdict, acknowledged that the information shared at the press conference was accurate while neglecting to recognize its violation of her presumption of innocence, particularly since the information regarding the criminal organization was later deemed incorrect.

The Higher Court ruling, which was accessed by “Vijesti,” stated that the prosecutor’s office announced reasonable suspicion of organized criminal activity without revealing the identities of the individuals involved fully and did not utilize language that would imply guilt or breach the presumption of innocence.

The explanation further noted that publicizing investigations into organized crime serves a legitimate interest, and there was no evidence that the prosecution aimed to discredit Pešukić.

Additionally, the Podgorica High Court confirmed that the Basic Court correctly dismissed Pešukić’s compensation request for non-pecuniary damage.

The court reminded that on October 15, 2020, the SDT hosted a press conference discussing its operational outcomes at which details concerning ongoing investigations were disclosed.

The High Court’s ruling indicated that retired special prosecutor Radović addressed the case involving the theft of valuables from the brother of the Montenegro President’s home, stating that the investigation stemmed from reasonable suspicions regarding the formation of a criminal organization in 2019, allegedly orchestrated by RF and its members PA and R. Č., extending through early April 2020, aimed at committing various property crimes, including aggravated theft as defined by Article 240 of the Criminal Code of Montenegro, for the sake of illegal profit and power.

The first instance court ultimately rejected Pešukić’s request, determining that the defendant did not infringe upon her honor and reputation in this instance, nor did she cause her non-pecuniary damage associated with a violation of her personal rights. This decision was founded on Articles 207 and 210 of the Law on Obligations, along with Articles 8 and 10 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. According to the court, the first instance court acted correctly in its conclusion.

The trial against Pešukić for theft is currently ongoing before the Podgorica Basic Court.

News