Sasho Mijalkov told Dragan Pavlovik-Latas on the audio recording of a phone conversation:
“What did I tell you that I will start making arrests on Monday? The elections concluded and the next day – boom”.
Sasho Mijalkov to Emil Stojmenov:
“I promised one thing, that I will start making arrests on Monday. I waited the 5th of June to pass, the campaign, to see who is who, and I’m starting to arrest from the sixth…And I started with the one who is…the most beautiful to be arrested.”
This, as you can listen to the tape, with euphoric tone, director of the Security and Intelligence Service Sasho Mijalkov is telling to the editor of “Sitel” Dragan Pavlovik-Latas, and the owner of “Kanal 5” Emil Stoimenov, after the “arrest” of Ljube Boshkoski, one day after the 2011 elections.
These calls were part of the third “bomb”, announced by opposition leader Zoran Zaev.
When arrest is mentioned, this procedure is usually associated with the police, not the Security and Intelligence Service.
Does Mijalkov has the right to make arrests?
Professor of the Faculty of Law “Justinian I” at “Ss. Cyril and Methodius” University Gordan Kalajdziev says UBK has the powers of the police and that it is a serious problem, which, despite the insistence of experts and NGOs, the authorities, namely the Ministry of Interior, is not solving.
Mixing, i.e. matching powers of UBK and the Public Security Bureau, arising from the regulations of the Law on Internal Affairs and the Law on Police, which, despite the amendments in them, changed nothing significant over the issue.
– Law of Interior failed to solve the issue of legal regulation of the powers of the members of the UBK. This matter is a legal gap since adopting the Constitution of the state. The decision of the Law on Police, members of the Security and Intelligence can apply police powers, is vague and undeveloped, which creates space for free interpretation in practice (for example, does that mean that UBK will have special armed units in their composition?). By being part authorities within the Ministry of Interior, it does not mean that the Security and Intelligence Service and the Public Security Bureau can take or give powers, authority and scope of work, depending on the particular case, but it should be fixed on clear and precise legal solutions, based on the Constitution – says Kalajdziev.
According to Kalajdziev, a reform of the security services is long needed, but it remains a taboo.
– There is a “quiet” and never underdeveloped debate on reform of the security services in the country. What is little perverse, Macedonia spend a lot of time and energy on processes of lustration of collaborators of the former regime, which derived that it is a notorious fact that the security services of the old party system operated as secret police and were some of the worst offenders of human rights . On the other hand, very few are working on establishing a new model of service that will be a service for security and democratic society that will operate in accordance with the principles of the rule of law – says Kalajdziev.
This creates another problem, feels Kalajdziev, because UBK is included in the new Law on Criminal Procedure, in the part “judicial police”, which are composed of all authorities having powers to detect and report a crime, in terms of detection of heavier forms of organized crime.
– It is certain that the service which functions as a “state within a state” since its formation until now will not easily subdue to an institution such as the public prosecutor – feels the professor.
MP and former interior minister Pavle Trajanov says on this topic that police and UBK have the same powers.
– The term arrest is Turkish and derives from the word prison. Here we refer to it as apprehension. And the police is the one which can apprehend someone and retain the person for a maximum of 24 hours. After the apprehension, police must immediately notify the court and the public prosecutor which are in charge of further proceedings. Detention, in turn, is determined by a judge at a prior procedure at the request of the public prosecutor – says Trajanov.
The new Law on Criminal Procedure, adopted in 2010, despite “apprehension”, introduced the term “deprivation of freedom”.
According to a new LCP and Law on Police, there must be an order of the court for apprehension, while it is not necessary for the deprivation of freedom.
Deprivation of freedom is, in fact, what was previously called apprehension without a court order, when a person is caught while committing a criminal offense, who is prosecuted ex officio and immediately after the offense.
– Apprehension is deprivation of freedom – says Trajanov.
The new LCP provides two situations for depriving a person of freedom without order of the court, and that deprivation of freedom by everyone and the deprivation of freedom by judicial police.
The detention of the person deprived of freedom cannot exceed 24 hours.