As it was already established by previous articles Zoran Pripuz, brother of Petar Pripuz (CEO of the C.I.O.S. group) was one of the persons indicted in the famous millennium case titled officially as “Criminal organisation case”, colloquially known as “Boys from Knežija” (Knežija being one of Zagreb’s neighbourhoods)”, he is also one of the founders of the C.I.O.M. company (mother company of the C.I.O.S. group) together with a close relative of the Ivan Leko (Berislav Leko).
Therefore, by establishing the process tracing in the cases of mortgage over the personal property, the data suggest that already in 2010 Slobodan Ljubičić owed the Knežija Boys – 5 million HRK. Shortly after that, in 2013 Slobodan Ljubičić became president of the Management Board of Zagreb Holding (CEO) for the second time and one of the most powerful associates of Zagreb’s Mayor Milan Bandić. After he took over the position of president of the Management Board of Zagreb Holding, the business between the C.I.O.S. group and the City (Zagreb) Holding intensified, and none of the competent institutions reacted or interfered with their business until the end of 2014 when the three – Bandić, Pripuz, and Ljubičić – were arrested in a spectacular action due to direct contracting of public procurement, which we wrote about earlier. However, immediately after their release from custody (November 2014), business of Zagreb Holding with the members of the, at the time suspected, C.I.O.S. group multiplied annually and reached over 50 million HRK (6,7 mill EUR) in 2015 despite the previous arrests (see previous article here). Regarding that conduct, there might be more issues which the criminal justice bodies in the AGRAM case didn’t cover, as established by the Fairpress.eu investigation. First, considering that Ivan Leko is one of the founders of C.I.O.M., which is the mother company of the C.I.O.S. group, a justified question is being raised of whether the C.I.O.S. group could’ve concluded any procurement contract with Zagreb Holding at all, since the Public Procurement Act (then article 13 of the PP Act and today’s articles 75 to 83 of the Public Procurement Act) explicitly prohibits conflict of interest in contracting procedures. In this case, there is a reasonable suspicion that a person closely tied to Slobodan Ljubičić’s private financial interest,had close ties to the company that was awarded the contract in the public procurement procedure by Zagreb Holding, where Ljubičić had strong and continuous influence as at the time
According to the Public Procurement Act, if public procurement contracts were to be concluded despite conflict of interest, such contracts would be considered null and void which would consequently lead to a criminal procedure against the persons involved. However, the investigative bodies didn’t cover this aspect of business conducting between Bandić, Ljubičić and Pripuz during the arrests in 2014, at least not according to the text of the indictment. On the other hand, if the stated situation doesn’t represent conflict of interest, the one that followed surely could. A month and a half after the arrests of 2014, as we stated at the beginning of the article, Petar Pripuz (CEO of the C.I.O.S. group) registered himself on the mortgage over the mentioned house and yard in Pantovčak, owned by Slobodan Ljubičić for an amount of 5 and a half million HRK. So, in continuation of this case, the CEO of CIOS Group (Pripuz) that was awarded the contract by Zagreb Hodling, during the time when Slobodan Ljubičić managed the hodling, loaned Ljubičić money, which establishes clear personal financial interest of Ljubičić and Pripuz during the contract award procedure. As the same persons were indicted in the AGRAM case just a few months before the contract was awarded to C.I.O.S. group, the appearance of conflict of interest is self-explanatory.
It also appears from the established facts that at the time, the group was in a hurry to register the mortgage over the Ljubičić’s property, in a sloppy procedure that was fixed soon after. As they realised that stating the name of Petar Pripuz in the mortgage (as loan giver) recorded in the Land register could pose an issue and raise some eyebrows by investigators or the interested public, already in April of the same year the mortgage was once more transferred to another party. Petar Pripuz was erased as the loan giver and the company EUROHALA d.o.o. (Ltd) was registered instead of him as the loan giver. As you can already assume yourselves, one of the fundamental members of the company EUROHALA d.o.o. (Ltd) is again Petar Pripuz. However, neither this caught the eye of the investigative bodies, judging by the indictment, which is still awaiting its confirmation before the court.
To recall, after the arrests the companies, i.e. companies which are part of the C.I.O.S. group, concluded three public procurement contracts with Zagreb Holding in the value of 21,9 million HRK; and upon the return of Slobodan Ljubičić to the position of assistant of the president of the Management Board of Zagreb Holding in November 2015, Zagreb Holding concluded two framework agreements each in the value of approximately 18 million HRK. It’s exactly these framework agreements that could be controversial from a conflict of interest standpoint, considering that we’ve indisputably proven in the previous articles that from his position, Slobodan Ljubičić “was able to influence the outcome of the public procurement procedure”, and at the moment of contracting he was already indebted to the president of Management and one of the key owners of the C.I.O.S., Petar Pripuz. In order for the concealment of the property owned by Slobodan Ljubičić to be finalised, i.e. in order for any possible seizure to be prevented if the criminal procedure ends bad for the aforementioned three, in 2016 and 2017 Ljubičić was trying to transfer the ownership over his villa in Pantovčak to his wife Ines Ljubičić based on a real estate deed of gift.
All of the aforementioned was happening before the eyes of USKOK and the police, without any reaction and record that these actions were recorded in the investigation, considering that none of the stated actions were mentioned in the indictment proposal, which three years after the arrests still awaits a decision, i.e. confirmation before the County court of Zagreb. What else is to be expected when after the arrests of Petar Pripuz, Slobodan Ljubičić and Milan Bandić for abuse of the public procurement procedure, MUP (Ministry of the Interior), as we wrote earlier, had been procuring, as well via public procurement, devices for automatic detection of car registration plates and hand-held speed-detection devices (the popular radars) instead of investigating these connections.