Duško Knežević acquitted in final judgment in the „Airports“ case

The Court of Appeals has upheld the acquittal delivered by the Special Division of the High Court in Podgorica in the case against Duško Knežević and Marko Nikolić, who were charged with abuse of position in business operations through incitement, Dijana Zečević, who was charged with abuse of position in business operations, and Atlas Bank, which was charged with abuse of position through incitement.

The Court of Appeals dismissed as unfounded the appeals filed by the Special State Prosecutor's Office and the legal representative of Airports of Montenegro, referring the claimant to civil proceedings for the pursuit of any property-related claims.

As a result, the High Court's judgment has become final.

- According to the indictment filed by the Special State Prosecutor's Office, Duško Knežević, Marko Nikolić, in his capacity as Chief Executive Officer of Atlas Bank AD Podgorica, and the legal entity Atlas Bank AD Podgorica (currently in bankruptcy), were accused of intentionally inciting Dijana Zečević, then Deputy Executive Director of Atlas Bank, to abuse her position by failing to transfer €3 million deposited by the injured party, Airports of Montenegro AD Podgorica, to the company's transaction account after the expiry of the fixed-term deposit agreement and its annex. Instead, the funds allegedly remained in the bank's account – the Court said.

The indictment further alleged that, through these actions, the defendants caused damages of €3 million to Airports of Montenegro while securing an unlawful financial benefit of the same amount for Atlas Bank

- In deciding on the appeals against the first-instance judgment, the Court of Appeal found that the High Court had correctly concluded that the prosecution failed to prove the criminal offences charged. The evidence presented before the first-instance court demonstrates that all actions undertaken by the defendants were aimed exclusively at extending the deposit agreement through the conclusion of Annex II to the original contract. This conclusion is supported by the undisputed communications between the parties regarding the extension, the scheduling of a meeting for the purpose of signing Annex II, the bank's continued payment of interest on the deposited funds, and its insistence that the annex be signed - the Court of Appeals stated.

The appellate decision also notes that Atlas Bank was clearly experiencing liquidity problems during the relevant period.

- Certain assets had been frozen, indicating that the defendants' sole intention was to secure the conclusion of Annex II in order to improve the bank's liquidity. There were also assurances from Airports of Montenegro that the annex would be signed. The Court of Appeals therefore found that the defendants were unaware that temporary administration and, subsequently, bankruptcy proceedings would be imposed. Their actions were undertaken with the objective of preventing temporary administration, the moratorium, and bankruptcy, as such developments would have been detrimental to the bank and, consequently, to all depositors - the Court explained.

According to the Court of Appeals, it was not established that the defendants' conduct resulted in Atlas Bank obtaining an unlawful financial benefit of €3 million, nor that Airports of Montenegro suffered damages in that amount. The Court emphasized that both unlawful gain and damage must be specifically established and cannot be presumed in the abstract.

- Furthermore, the Court pointed out that a breach of contractual obligations does not automatically give rise to criminal liability. Failure to perform contractual obligations constitutes a matter governed by Article 1138(2) of the Law on Obligations, which regulates the legal relationship between creditor and debtor in monetary deposit agreements where the debtor has failed to fulfil contractual obligations. Such circumstances may give rise to civil liability under the rules of civil procedure, but not automatically to criminal responsibility - the Court of Appeals stated.