Due to a false complaint against the Director of the Communication Office of the Government of the Republic of Slovenia, Uroš Urbanija, a criminal complaint was filed against Katarina Bervar Sternad and Nataša Pirc Musar on June 9th, 2021.
Since Katarina Bervar Sternad and Nataša Pirc Musar filed a criminal complaint against the Director of the Communication Office of the Government of the Republic of Slovenia, Uroš Urbanija, in the case of the alleged victim of Slovenska tiskovna agencija Ltd, Ljubljana, for which they knew it did not constitute a criminal offense, a criminal complaint was filed against them on June 9th, 2021 due to a false complaint under the first paragraph of Article 283 of the Penal Code (KZ-1).
In a false criminal complaint dated on May 17th, 2021, Katarina Bervar Sternad and Nataša Pirc Musar accused the Director of the Communication Office of the Government of the Republic of Slovenia, Uroš Urbanija, of abusing his position, crossing the border of official rights and waiving his official duties, despite the fact that as university law graduates on the basis of knowledge of legal regulations in the Republic of Slovenia and on the basis of documents submitted as evidence in a false complaint of 17.5.2021 they knew that the criminal complaint filed against Uroš Urbanija does not constitute a crime.
A criminal complaint with similar allegations against the director of UKOM, Uroš Urbanija, was already filed by the Slovenian Journalists’ Union in December 2020. The criminal complaint was rejected, as the District State Prosecutor’s Office in Ljubljana found that Uroš Urbanija did not commit any officially prosecuted act in his work in relation to the STA.
As of January 1st, 2021, UKOM has not had any legal relationship with the STA on the basis of which it could transfer STA funds. The legal basis on the basis of which UKOM disbursed funds for the provision of public service to STA was the annual contract between UKOM and STA on the provision of public service. As, despite numerous calls from UKOM for a public service contract between STA and UKOM for 2021, STA did not express an interest in concluding a contract, UKOM did not have this legal basis for the payment of STA funds. Article 66 of the ZIUPOPDVA (i.e. PKP7) also does not provide a sufficient basis for the payment of STA funds by UKOM, as it does not oblige UKOM to pay funds for the provision of STA’s public service.
Article 66 of the PKP7 stipulates, inter alia, that funds for the provision of the STA public service in 2021 should be provided in accordance with the STA Business Plan for 2021. The STA Business Plan for 2021, adopted by STA, states that STA obtains funds for the provision of public service under the ZSTAgen on the basis of an annual contract between the founder and STA. Moreover, the conditions for the payment of compensation, for its use, the deadlines and method of payment and the requirements related to the company’s reporting on costs related to the provision of public service, are set out in the annual public service contract with STA.
In view of the above, the director of UKOM has repeatedly called on director Veselinović to conclude a new contract, but unfortunately the director obviously violates both ZSTAgen when he does not perform public service, as well as PKP7, and finally his own business plan for 2021.