Former Serbian Finance Minister Accused of Involvement in Railway Reconstruction Controversy
Inquiry Commission Challenges Mlađan Dinkić's Denial Regarding Railway Project Funding
The Inquiry Commission investigating the responsibilities surrounding the collapse of the canopy at the railway station in Novi Sad has rebutted claims made by former Serbian Finance Minister Mlađan Dinkić.
Dinkić had denied any involvement in decisions related to the reconstruction of the railway leading to the Hungarian border.
In a statement issued by the commission, it was asserted that Dinkić played a significant role in negotiations with European officials about funding for railway reconstruction since 2008. Notably, the committee highlighted that on January 11, 2013, Dinkić signed a contract worth $800 million with Russian Finance Minister Anton Siluanov, following the rise to power of the Serbian Progressive Party (SNS).
The Inquiry Commission posed several questions to Dinkić, seeking clarification on various points:
1. What was the preliminary estimated cost for the modernization projects of the Belgrade-Novi Sad and Novi Sad-Kelebija rail lines?
2. Were negotiations conducted with the European Union, the European Investment Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and the World Bank regarding project financing?
If so, what constituted the financial structure?
3. Why were guarantees for the European Investment Bank excluded from the 2013 Serbian state budget, despite their presence before 2012?
4. Why did he choose to abandon EU funding in favor of signing a contract with Russia?
5. Did the ministry he led provide a positive opinion on Annex 2 of the Agreement on Economic and Technical Cooperation in Infrastructure between the Government of Serbia and the Government of the People's Republic of China, which allowed for a lack of competitive bidding for investment works, potentially leading to non-transparent contracting?
The commission expressed gratitude to Dinkić for his willingness to cooperate but also called for him to substantiate his claims with specific documents and information.
In response, Dinkić insisted that claims made by Vladimir Obradović at the Inquiry Commission's press conference were incorrect, asserting that he did not participate in any decisions regarding the railway reconstruction project.
He emphasized that when he was in government, this project did not exist and that his previous portfolios did not include transportation or construction.
Dinkić further stated that he has not been involved in government roles for over 12 years and has had no contact with politics, the state, or the public sector during that time.
Dinkić had denied any involvement in decisions related to the reconstruction of the railway leading to the Hungarian border.
In a statement issued by the commission, it was asserted that Dinkić played a significant role in negotiations with European officials about funding for railway reconstruction since 2008. Notably, the committee highlighted that on January 11, 2013, Dinkić signed a contract worth $800 million with Russian Finance Minister Anton Siluanov, following the rise to power of the Serbian Progressive Party (SNS).
The Inquiry Commission posed several questions to Dinkić, seeking clarification on various points:
1. What was the preliminary estimated cost for the modernization projects of the Belgrade-Novi Sad and Novi Sad-Kelebija rail lines?
2. Were negotiations conducted with the European Union, the European Investment Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and the World Bank regarding project financing?
If so, what constituted the financial structure?
3. Why were guarantees for the European Investment Bank excluded from the 2013 Serbian state budget, despite their presence before 2012?
4. Why did he choose to abandon EU funding in favor of signing a contract with Russia?
5. Did the ministry he led provide a positive opinion on Annex 2 of the Agreement on Economic and Technical Cooperation in Infrastructure between the Government of Serbia and the Government of the People's Republic of China, which allowed for a lack of competitive bidding for investment works, potentially leading to non-transparent contracting?
The commission expressed gratitude to Dinkić for his willingness to cooperate but also called for him to substantiate his claims with specific documents and information.
In response, Dinkić insisted that claims made by Vladimir Obradović at the Inquiry Commission's press conference were incorrect, asserting that he did not participate in any decisions regarding the railway reconstruction project.
He emphasized that when he was in government, this project did not exist and that his previous portfolios did not include transportation or construction.
Dinkić further stated that he has not been involved in government roles for over 12 years and has had no contact with politics, the state, or the public sector during that time.
AI Disclaimer: An advanced artificial intelligence (AI) system generated the content of this page on its own. This innovative technology conducts extensive research from a variety of reliable sources, performs rigorous fact-checking and verification, cleans up and balances biased or manipulated content, and presents a minimal factual summary that is just enough yet essential for you to function as an informed and educated citizen. Please keep in mind, however, that this system is an evolving technology, and as a result, the article may contain accidental inaccuracies or errors. We urge you to help us improve our site by reporting any inaccuracies you find using the "Contact Us" link at the bottom of this page. Your helpful feedback helps us improve our system and deliver more precise content. When you find an article of interest here, please look for the full and extensive coverage of this topic in traditional news sources, as they are written by professional journalists that we try to support, not replace. We appreciate your understanding and assistance.
