The verdict of the Higher Court was confirmed: Miomir Mugoša was acquitted of the charge of abuse of official position

SOURCE: ANTENA M - AUTHOR: M.J. GDNUS

After a public session of the council on 04.02.2025, the Court of Appeals of Montenegro issued a verdict rejecting the appeal of the Special State Prosecutor's Office as unfounded and upholding the verdict of the Higher Court in Podgorica - Special Department, Case No. 10/23 of 22.07.2024. This became a final verdict acquitting the accused Miomir Mugoša of the charge of committing the criminal offense of abuse of official position, the court announced.

"The Special State Prosecutor's Office filed an appeal against the aforementioned judgment with a proposal that the Court of Appeal quash the first-instance judgment and return the case to that court for a new trial and decision.

In the opinion of the Court of Appeal, and contrary to the allegations in the appeal of the Special State Prosecutor's Office, the conclusion of the Higher Court in Podgorica, as the court of first instance, is correct, that during the proceedings it was not proven beyond a doubt that the accused, in the period from 25.07.2007 to 08.05.2012, as an official - public official - Mayor of the Capital City of Podgorica, used his official position and exceeded the limits of his official authority in order to obtain benefit for another and cause damage to the Capital City of Podgorica, by issuing two decisions on the transfer of rights to city construction land for the purpose of completing urban plots.

In the opinion of the Court of Appeal, the Court of First Instance gave clear and complete reasons for all decisive facts, which are consistent both with each other and with the evidence presented. Based on the evidence presented "... at the main trial and their comprehensive assessments, both individually and in relation to each other, bringing them into connection with the defense of the accused, the first instance court correctly and according to the legal understanding of this court, established the decisive facts on which it based its conclusions that it was not proven that the accused committed the criminal offense with which he is charged," the statement states.