The European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) has commenced an investigation into the potential misuse of EU funds related to the reconstruction of the railway station in Novi Sad, as confirmed by Chief European Prosecutor Laura Koveši. The investigation was initiated based on a complaint from a private individual and concerns financial resources allocated to the project by the European Investment Bank.

Koveši stated, "We are the first transnational European prosecutorial authority, and our main jurisdiction is to investigate fraud involving EU money and to protect its financial interests.

We have jurisdiction in 24 member states of the European Prosecutor's Office, as well as in third countries when EU money is involved and there's potential harm to any European institutions.

This can include the European Commission, the European Investment Bank, or other institutions that finance projects outside the EU. Our role is to investigate how EU money has been spent, whether it has been used properly for its intended purposes, which is why we have opened this investigation in Serbia.

To be very clear, we are not investigating the accident itself in Novi Sad; we are not looking into how those young individuals and victims died.

Our jurisdiction is to see if there has been any misappropriation of EU funds, corruption, or money laundering concerning EU money."

Koveši explained that the EPPO can respond "if we receive a tip-off, even from a private party, or from an institution, or ex officio if we see information in the public domain that gives us grounds for an investigation." In this instance, she noted, "we received a complaint from a private individual, and that was the basis for opening this investigation." She emphasized that citizens of Serbia can submit information about possible abuses of European funds: "I can say that if any citizen of Serbia has any information on how EU money is used in Serbia, they can send it to us, any kind of complaint, via email, on our website, or to any office of the European Public Prosecutor's Office in the 24 member states."

Koveši asserted the need for cooperation from Serbian authorities in the investigation.

"We need the support of the Serbian authorities, as we do in any investigation.

The main difference when we talk about member states is that our European delegated prosecutors are embedded in the national system, so they can conduct searches, have access to databases, and can request any type of information.

When it comes to a third country like Serbia, we must rely on the support of state authorities.

All our requests will go to the Public Prosecutor's Office and our colleagues, Serbian prosecutors, and we must rely on their assistance.

We will see if they will help us.

I can say that in 2022, we began discussions with the Public Prosecutor's Office to sign a working arrangement aimed at enhancing cooperation and establishing contact points.

We sent a draft document.

We have not yet received a response regarding its signing.

In the meantime, I must say that we submitted three requests in three different cases to the Public Prosecutor's Office, and in all those cases, Serbian prosecutors have cooperated with us.

I hope that in this case as well, they will cooperate and provide all the information and evidence we need,"
Koveši remarked.

Koveši also highlighted that Serbia is the only candidate country for EU membership that has not yet signed a working agreement with the EPPO.

"I do not know the reason why a working agreement has not yet been reached.

It is for them to answer.

We are open to signing.

We have signed with Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Montenegro.

We await their response, but we can cooperate even without such a working arrangement,"
she stated.

Given that the investigation is taking place in a non-EU member state, any potential court proceedings could be held in Belgium or Luxembourg.

"According to our regulations, we usually send cases to domestic courts.

For example, if we are investigating in Germany, Romania, or France, cases are typically sent to the national courts in those countries.

In this case, since it pertains to a third country, the place of damage is considered to be either Luxembourg or Belgium, where European institutions are headquartered.

This means we have the opportunity to investigate this case and potentially send it to court in these countries," Koveši concluded.