What “Price of Justice” Investigates
Founded in 1945, the High Public Prosecutor’s Office in Skopje operates largely out of public view. Yet it holds one of the most consequential powers in North Macedonia’s justice system: it determines the fate of cases once they reach the Court of Appeal — when verdicts from first-instance courts are challenged. Inside the appellate courtroom, just 12 prosecutors can effectively uphold or dismantle years of investigative and judicial work done by their colleagues from lower instances. With a single decision — by withdrawing an appeal or declining to pursue an indictment — they can allow a case to stand or cause it to collapse.
In its investigation “The Price of Justice,” IRL turns its focus to this little-scrutinized institution, examining what it describes as a critical weak point in a system vulnerable to abuse. The High Public Prosecutor’s Office, despite its authority, has operated for years with minimal oversight from the media or civil society. This investigation opens precisely that door – seeking answers to two questions: What happens to sensitive cases on appeal? And what happens to those inside the system who dare to speak out?
Within an institution more than eight decades old — where a small circle of senior prosecutors wields decisive influence over whether cases survive or disappear — a group of women chose to break their silence. Instead of receiving institutional protection, they say they faced pressure and persecution – not for abuse of power, but for revealing the truth.
The investigation “The Price of Justice” follows the corruption revealed by a few brave officials, but also what happens when those in power were confronted with potential criminal liability. IRL journalists worked for eight months to prove the shortcomings and for the first time the investigation outlines what it characterizes as an entrenched system that benefits from a judiciary under influence. The journalists examined court proceedings, gathered testimony, and reviewed extensive public records and for the first time the reporting shows how formal mechanisms of accountability can be redirected — turning into tools of reprisal rather than justice. According to the findings, structures intended to prosecute organized crime and corruption have, in certain instances, shielded powerful networks spanning the criminal underworld, political elites, and business interests. This criminally organized system is turning into a monstrous industry tasked with lynching those who dare to speak out: journalists, prosecutors, civil servants.
The investigation also documents the personal cost of this reporting. During the 12 months in which “The Price of Justice” was prepared, two IRL journalists were placed under physical protection for one month following public threats linked to the investigation. The newsroom reports that individuals named or implicated in the reporting appeared to have advance knowledge of the documents being sought — information that, according to IRL, could only have originated from within court or prosecutorial institutions. What followed, the journalists say, was a coordinated public campaign targeting the media outlet and its staff, including smear efforts, intimidation, and threats — some of them sexual in nature. “The Price of Justice” ultimately raises broader concerns about institutional accountability and the risks faced by investigative journalists working to expose corruption at the highest levels of the justice system.
Why This Investigation Matters
Integrity and professionalism in the justice system are not abstract principles but rather a structural determinant of democratic stability and economic development. They determine whether prosperity is shared by all citizens — or reserved for a privileged few. Where prosecutorial independence is weak, the rule of law becomes selective.
In North Macedonia, trust in the prosecution and the courts has been eroding for years — lingering over public life like a constant shadow. Public trust data reflects this erosion and the data are consistent, year after year. Surveys by Transparency International, Eurobarometer and the International Republican Institute consistently rank the judiciary among the least trusted institutions in North Macedonia.
While exact percentages fluctuate, the trend is stable: a majority of citizens believe justice is uneven- accessible to some, distant for others, and that political and oligarchic influence permeates judicial processes. Many are convinced that political and oligarchic influence moves more swiftly through court corridors than the law itself. The pattern is familiar. High-profile arrests dominate headlines. Promises of reform are delivered with confidence. Then these high-profile arrests are often followed by prolonged proceedings, procedural collapse, stalled trials — or silence. Over time, public enthusiasm gives way to fatigue. Citizens learn to ration their hope. Reform promises are repeated; public confidence continues to decline.
In such an environment, transparency is not symbolic — it is corrective. This is precisely why sustained civic scrutiny matters. Meaningful resistance cannot be built on suspicion alone. It requires facts — verified, documented, and irrefutable. When abuses are exposed with evidence, the public can move from rumor to accountability.
In the architecture of justice, prosecutors hold the initiating power and in the chain of justice, they hold the decisive link. They activate criminal proceedings, translate evidence into formal charges and decide whether cases move forward or stop. They represent victims, safeguard public resources and institutional integrity, seek restitution and ensure that harm to society is formally acknowledged. Their discretion carries immense weight: evidence can become accountability — or it can disappear into procedural obscurity. Without skilled and independent prosecutors, even the most serious crimes remain socially condemned but legally unresolved.
1. The “Disappearing” Paper Trail and Procedural Manipulation: The investigation uncovered evidence of procedural manipulation at the very first entry point of a case: its official receipt; by consciously removing the formal trace of receipt, an illegal act has been committed, which, in turn, allows for manipulation of the procedure. In every public institution, the receipt stamp is the primary proof that a document has been formally received. It establishes timelines, triggers statutory deadlines, and determines procedural urgency. Without it, there is no verifiable starting point. Oversight findings revealed that mail received from the Court of Appeal bore no official receipt stamp. Instead, the date of receipt was handwritten. This is not a minor clerical lapse. It creates the ability to retroactively “control” when a case is deemed to have entered the system — directly affecting deadlines, priority status, and procedural order. By removing or bypassing the formal trace of receipt, officials create space for manipulation: documents can be treated as received when it is convenient — and ignored when it is not. |
2. Delayed Filing and Controlled Case Allocation: Through the systematic disregard of case registration rules, irregularities were committed that create conditions for manipulative case allocation. Rules governing prosecutorial operations are explicit: cases must be formally filed the same day they are received, or no later than the following working day. The oversight report found that this rule was repeatedly ignored. Cases were left unfiled for days — in violation of Articles 22, 30, and 35 of the Rules on Internal Operations of Prosecutors’ Offices. When filing is deliberately delayed, the distribution process becomes vulnerable. A case that is not officially entered into the system cannot be automatically assigned. The delay creates a window of discretion — allowing the “right” case to reach the “right” prosecutor at the “right” moment. |
3. The Push to Funnel High-Stakes Cases to the Bottleneck of the Roman II Prosecutor: Through a series of unfounded and contradictory withdrawals, the office has been accused of stretching prosecutorial discretion to its breaking point. This administrative sleight of hand creates a "procedural vacuum" that effectively shields sensitive files from independent judicial review. The oversight also identified strong indications of unlawful pressure to channel sensitive or high-stakes cases toward a specific prosecutor – a situation that the oversight treats as criminally relevant. In the case known as “Serta,” testimony from a court officer states that the head of the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office in Skopje, Mustafa Hajlurahi, gave explicit instructions for the case to be assigned to prosecutor Jovan Cvetanovski. The supervisory review analyzed 39 cases. In four of them, it concluded that elements of criminal conduct related to unprofessional or unlawful prosecutorial action were present — grounds for potential criminal liability. In all four cases with identified criminal consequences, the prosecutor who waived appeals or withdrew indictments was Jovan Cvetanovski. Additional procedural omissions were noted in the remaining 35 analyzed cases. When a senior prosecutor withdraws an appeal or abandons an indictment, the appellate court has nothing left to review. The case effectively ends. In the “Postenska Banka” case, the withdrawal of the appeal by senior prosecutor Jovan Cvetanovski was flagged by oversight authorities as lacking valid justification. The effect was the closure of proceedings without substantive judicial review. In “Serta,” the Supreme Court later identified a legal violation that could have been remedied — had the appeal not been withdrawn. The withdrawal, in practical terms, closed the door to correction. |
4. Potential Abuse of Media Resources for Public Pressure and Intimidation of Prosecutors, Witnesses, and Journalists When a prosecutor initiates proceedings involving powerful figures and is simultaneously targeted by a media campaign questioning his integrity — while witnesses who report irregularities are publicly attacked — the line between public scrutiny and obstruction begins to blur. If it is established that:
then such conduct may qualify as:
|
Stories
Roman Numeral II
IRL dismantles, for the first time, the scheme through which prosecutors manipulated the course of justice in North Macedonia. Behind the institutional façade, a quieter system operates — one shaped by networks of influence embedded within the law-enforcement structure.
Engineered Justice
Inside North Macedonia’s Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office in Skopje, five employees say they were drawn into a system where the fate of criminal cases could be quietly steered behind closed doors. Two ultimately chose to take a step rarely seen within such a system.
Documentary Film
* The documentary “Price of Justice” was removed from YouTube following copyright claims filed by Plusinfo and Lider. Short excerpts from their videos were used in the film to critique media propaganda that operates in protection of corrupt power holders. The decision was made by an algorithm, not a human. IRL has filed a counter-notification requesting a review. In the meantime, we have received a 90-day publishing ban on YouTube, so we will be releasing our content on Facebook and Spotify.
Project Team
Project Editor: Sashka Cvetkovska, Bojan Stojanovski
Journalists: Bojan Stojanovski, Maja Jovanovska, Sashka Cvetkovska
Video Team: Vladimir Vladimirov, Sara Pankovska, Gorjan Atanasov, Trifun Sitnikovski, Trajce Antonovski, Boris Ralev, Marko Rikaloski, Sashka Cvetkovska
Web Design: Elena Mitrevska Cuckovska
Graphics: Luka Blazev
Communications: Denica Chadikovska
