Criminal complaint filed against MP Bratuškova over conduct as head of oversight commission
A criminal complaint has been filed against Alenka Bratuškova. She is accused of exceeding the remit of the Commission for Oversight of Public Finance whilst conducting a session.
Criminal complaint filed against MP Bratuškova over conduct as head of oversight commission
A complaint has been submitted to the competent public prosecutor's office against Alenka Bratuškova, an MP from the Freedom Movement party. The complaint was signed by Marko Lotrič, head of the Focus party, and Minister Monika Kirbiš Rojs. They believe that the politician abused her position as chair of the body that oversees state spending.
The matter in dispute is that Bratuškova convened and chaired a session at which a question was discussed that, according to the complainants, falls outside the remit of this committee. Meanwhile, she herself proposed that the Court of Audit should review the operations of Lotrič's Focus party – from the moment it was registered as a political party through to this year's March elections.
Bratuškova defends herself with the argument that no one is immune from scrutiny over how taxpayers' money is spent. In her view, it is essential to establish whether the state council subsidised Focus's operations through individual contracts. She stated that Miro Petek received €51,500 from that council, and in addition €8,000 for updating a list of media of non-governmental organisations and an equal amount for an analysis of municipal media.
From her perspective, Focus is a political organisation, not a private association, and therefore the spending of funds must be transparent. She also noted that after the said session, the party changed its financial statement.
Lotrič responds that the complaint was expected and is well-founded. He cites Article 93 of the rules of procedure of the National Assembly, which according to his interpretation permits review only of public spending bodies. Focus should not be among them, and before the elections it should not have received any funds. He emphasises that all activities were financed from their own resources. He also claims that all inspections by the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption and legal opinions confirmed the propriety of their conduct.
Source: 24ur.com
Source: 24ur