A dispute between Croatia and the European Union over who ought to examine a high-profile corruption case involving a former minister deepened on Thursday after the bloc’s chief prosecutor mentioned Zagreb had issues upholding the rule of regulation.
The row erupted after Croatian authorities ordered the arrest of ex-Well being Minister Vili Beros on suspicion of corruption final week – after which the European Public Prosecutor’s Workplace (EPPO) mentioned it had been working its personal wider investigation into the case and had been about to order searches.
Beros denies any wrongdoing. He was fired and detained for one month, pending the investigations.
Either side mentioned that they had not been knowledgeable of the opposite investigation. The EU mentioned it ought to take over. However Croatia’s State Lawyer Common, Ivan Turudic, dominated this week that his nation’s Workplace for the Suppression of Corruption and Organised Crime (USKOK) would prosecute the case.
The EU chief prosecutor mentioned they handed over their information on Thursday to Croatia – following EU guidelines – however issued a press release saying they strongly disagreed with the choice.
They mentioned that they had written to the European Fee “underlining Croatia’s systemic challenges in upholding the rule of regulation,” with out going into better element.
They mentioned the State Lawyer Common had based mostly “his determination solely on USKOK’s interpretation, with out giving the EPPO the possibility to specific its place, and thus undermining the impartiality of the battle decision”. It was not instantly clear if the EU prosecutors have been planning to take extra concrete motion to reclaim the case.
The EPPO has mentioned a legal group in search of to safe financing for the sale of medical robotic gadgets in a number of hospitals was suspected of giving bribes to officers to attempt to win contracts for tasks, together with EU-funded ones.
Turudic mentioned his workplace was appearing based mostly on the relevant Croatian regulation, and the case was not associated to EU funds.
