Croatia, Plenković against the European Prosecutor's Office

Post-earthquake European funds awarded without tender: according to a journalistic investigation, this is embezzlement. This is where an open conflict arises between the European Prosecutor's Office and Croatian Prime Minister Plenković, which risks having repercussions also on the upcoming legislative elections

Until a few weeks ago, for Croatian Culture Minister Nina Obuljen Koržinek the information revealed by the Telegram journalist Dora Kršul was only “slanderous fake news ”. Today it is at the centre of an open clash between Prime Minister Andrej Plenković and the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) and could have an impact on the upcoming legislative elections in Croatia.

Profiting from the earthquake

The case involves the potential misappropriation of European funds in the 3D mapping operation of some buildings damaged by the two earthquakes that hit Croatia in 2020. According to what was published by the Telegram   at the end of 2023, four years ago the Croatian Ministry of Culture awarded – without public tender and with a decision by the minister Obuljen Koržinek herself – just over 2.5 million Euros to the Faculty of Geodesy of Zagreb to map in 3D around 200 buildings affected by the earthquake (even if the information that the portal received from the ministry regarding the precise number of buildings analysed and their surface area is actually conflicting).

However, the prices charged by the Faculty of Geodesy would be inflated compared to those that Telegram was able to obtain from various private companies. Furthermore, the Faculty obtained the assignment without going through a tender for reasons of urgency, or due to the natural disaster that had just occurred, but then subcontracted the work to others, not having the means to complete the project. Alerted by Dora Kršul's investigation, the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) launched an investigation at the end of last year, having ascertained that a good part of the sum paid to the Faculty of Geodesy – 1.6 million Euros – came from the European Fund of Solidarity.

The case of 3D mapping of buildings is not the only one involving the Faculty of Geodesy. Already at the end of last year, the European prosecutor's office had requested the arrest of 29 faculty employees (including the dean)  on suspicion of fraud, falsification of official documents and misappropriation of European funds. At the time EPPO had made it known that the damage to the European Union's coffers would be at least 1.7 million Euros out of a total of almost 6 million Euros of projects 85% financed by the EU (the suspects would have bought some cars and even a boat with European funds). However, on February 16 the story became political, when the police raided the Ministry of Culture in Zagreb on a mandate from the EPPO.

At that point the Croatian Prime Minister also took the field, supporting the Minister of Culture and attacking – in some visibly annoyed statements – the head of the European Prosecutor's Office, Romanian magistrate Laura Kövesi. According to Plenković, the EPPO investigation into the Faculty of Geodesy would have nothing to do with the 3D mapping of buildings, because in that case no European funding would be involved, but only national funds. EPPO – the Prime Minister assured – would therefore be acting outside its mandate and the Croatian prosecutor's office should deal with the matter. “We are the first to want to know if there has been fraud”, said Plenković, but the competence does not lie with the European Prosecutor's Office.

Back and forth between Zagreb and Luxembourg

The European chief prosecutor reacted soon. In mid-February, in a comment for N1 , Laura Kövesi recalled the support received from the Croatian government in Croatia's accession to the EPPO (an institution operational since 2021 and in which 23 member states currently participate) and said: “ I trust that the Croatian Prime Minister does not want to interfere in the EPP investigations". Also, continued the judge, "such a development would constitute a serious violation of the correct functioning of the investigative services and prosecutors' offices, in relation [...] to the protection of the financial interests of the Union".

Hit where it hurts, Plenković abandoned diplomatic tones and at the end of February , repeating that the jurisdiction over the case of the Faculty of Geodesy lies "100%" with the Croatian prosecutor's office, he said he was "astonished that [Laura Kövesi, ed.] dared comment that way". To better understand the context for this exchange, we also need to consider the fact that the new Croatian general prosecutor Ivan Turudić – appointed at the beginning of February by the Zagreb parliament on the recommendation of the government and amidst a thousand controversies – chose his first interview to attack the European Prosecutor's Office itself, stating: "I'm not sure we should have adopted that institution, many countries don't have it".

On Sunday March 10, in a long interview with N1 , the director of the European Public Prosecutor's Office decided to dot the "i's". "Whoever has doubts about our mandate should turn to the European Court of Justice", cut short Kövesi who, pressed by the journalist on the behaviour of the Croatian Prime Minister, said: "I refer to my experience in Romania. I've seen this move before. It's a textbook example of politicians creating a smokescreen in front of citizens". In short, there is an attempt to cast doubt on the competence of the EPPO, while "the real question, which interests citizens, is: was there fraud or not?". If EPPO is hindered in its work – added Kövesi – it will not hesitate to report it to the European Commission, which could compromise the regular flow of European funds to Croatia. "We will not be intimidated", concluded the judge.

Rien ne va plus

Prime Minister Andrej Plenković's last conference on Monday 11 March  marked a new record of nervousness. The Croatian Prime Minister taunted journalists , moving the microphones and once again asking the Croatian prosecutor's office (Dorh) and its Office for the Suppression of Corruption and Organized Crime (Uskok) to intervene to assert their jurisdiction. The next day, Tuesday 12 March, Uskok published a statement on its website in which it announced that it had asked EPPO  to transfer the documents relating to the opening of the investigation against the Faculty of Geodesy, to evaluate on what basis EPPO regards itself as competent in the case.

The scenario is the following: the national prosecutor, under pressure from the government, questions the European prosecutor about an ongoing case. It is an unusual situation to say the least and for this reason the Croatian press is wondering about the reasons for such insistence by the government and the Prime Minister himself. If the important thing is to find out whether or not there has been fraud – as Plenković himself assured – what problem is there if the European Public Prosecutor's Office deals with it? Or is there a risk that the Croatian government cannot control the results of the investigation, as perhaps it could do if the Croatian prosecutor was leading it?

Finally, the case is mounting a few weeks before the legislative elections in which Andrej Plenković is running in search of a third mandate. Today, March 14, parliament will be dissolved and Croatian citizens will be called to vote between the end of April and the beginning of May. Will the government be able to resist until then? Or will the Minister of Culture also end up in handcuffs? This would be the 31^st minister or undersecretary to leave the Croatian government due to a corruption scandal since Plenković has gained power in 2016.