Newsroom Archives - IRL

Press "Enter" to skip to content

Price of Justice

Price of Justice

13.03.2026

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…

Engineered Justice

Engineered Justice

13.03.2026

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. Their testimonies describe how, they allege, cases were directed to specific prosecutors at the instruction of their superior — pressure, they say, aimed at influencing how…

Roman Numeral II

Roman Numeral II

13.03.2026

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. IRL’s investigation reveals how crucial decisions are forged away from public scrutiny: behind office doors, across desks stacked with case files, and within the bureaucratic machinery that quietly determines whether justice proceeds…

The “Postal Bank” case dates back more than two decades. For just as long, investigators have examined the privatization of the country’s first state bank. The case was reopened in 2018 by the then Special Public Prosecutor’s Office (SPO). After the dissolution of the SPO, however, the case was transferred to the Prosecutor’s Office for the Prosecution of Organized Crime and Corruption.

On June 13, 2024, the Criminal Court in Skopje halted the proceedings, citing the controversial amendments to the Criminal Code adopted by the government of SDSM and DUI. The case had been conducted against businessman Tome Glavchev, current president of the Basketball Federation of Macedonia; Ratko Dimitrovski, former mayor of Kochani from VMRO-DPMNE; and the lawyer Zoran Shuklev.

They were prosecuted on charges of abuse of official position and money laundering. The oversight established that the Criminal Court’s decision did not specify under which article of the Criminal Procedure Code the proceedings had been terminated.

The Prosecutor’s Office for the Prosecution of Organized Crime and Corruption, dissatisfied with the ruling, filed an appeal, arguing that Glavchev, Dimitrovski, and Shuklev should at minimum face accountability for the offense of money laundering.

However, High Public Prosecutor Jovan Cvetanovski waived the right to pursue the appeal before the Court of Appeal. He justified this decision through an official note, yet the oversight concluded that the reasons given for withdrawing the appeal were contradictory and unclear.

“Public Prosecutors Lile Stefanova and Elvin Veli believe that by withdrawing the appeal of the Basic Public Prosecutor’s Office for the Prosecution of Organized Crime and Corruption, the public prosecutor from the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office Skopje did not act professionally, expertly and legally,” the report states.

Prosecutor Dzelal Bajrami, however, assessed that Cvetanovski had acted within his competencies. With the appeal withdrawn, the Court of Appeal no longer had the opportunity to consider the case. The proceedings were effectively closed.

The second case concerns illegal construction in the village of Zelenikovo involving Dragan Pavlovik-Latas and his two brothers, Zvezdan and Srdzan Pavlovik. On July 4, 2019, the Criminal Court acquitted them of all charges. The same verdict was reached again during the retrial on July 18, 2022.

The Public Prosecutor’s Office in Skopje filed an appeal. On October 10, 2023, the appeal was accepted and a hearing was scheduled before the Skopje Court of Appeal. On November 6, 2023, the case was formally presented at the Public Prosecutor’s Office. Present at the session were the then State Public Prosecutor Ljubomir Joveski, public prosecutors Ferat Elezi and Sonja Simovska, and high public prosecutors Mustafa Hajrullahi and Jovan Cvetanovski.

“The conclusion from the presentation was that the public prosecutor representing the case at the Court of Appeal should propose commissioning an expert examination to determine whether the actions taken in the construction works constituted preparatory acts and to establish the date when construction began. An expert witness should be summoned to the main hearing to clarify the open questions,” the oversight report from the Skopje Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office states.

The very next day, the defense for the Pavlovik brothers submitted a new piece of evidence to the Court of Appeal — an expert report and opinion prepared by a defense-appointed expert witness. Cvetanovski requested that the hearing be postponed so he could cross-examine the expert. However, according to the oversight findings, what followed raised serious concerns.

“The public prosecutor at the hearing did not ask the questions he had previously announced in the record from November 7, 2024, and the questions that were posed did not elicit answers from the expert on the disputed issues raised during the presentation before the Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of North Macedonia,” the report states.

Cvetanovski also failed to follow the instructions issued during the internal prosecutorial meeting at the prosecution office to commission an independent expert examination. Instead, he accepted the expert report submitted by the defense.

“The public prosecutor acted contrary to Article 37 of the Rulebook on Internal Operations of Public Prosecutor’s Offices, according to which the position and opinion adopted after the presentation are binding for the lower public prosecutor’s office,” prosecutors Lile Stefanova and Elvin Veli wrote in the oversight report.

However, the third member of the supervisory commission, Dzelal Bajrami, disagreed. He concluded that Cvetanovski had acted in accordance with the conclusions adopted during the presentation at the internal prosecutorial meeting.

The third case examined during the oversight concerns the “Serta” case, involving public tenders for cleaning government institutions. The case reached the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office after the Basic Public Prosecutor’s Office filed an appeal against a decision of the Criminal Court.

When reviewing the indictment, the Criminal Court accepted the objections raised by the accused Spaso Gjorgiev and the company “Serta,” who were prosecuted for abuse of procedures in a public procurement call. On January 29, 2024, the Basic Public Prosecutor’s Office appealed that decision.

It was in connection with this case that a report emerged of pressure being exerted on an official at the Skopje Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office responsible for registration and allocation of cases. According to her testimony, she received instructions from the then head of the Higher Prosecutor’s Office, Mustafa Hajrullahi, indicating which prosecutor should be assigned to the case.

“For the ‘Serta’ case, I was told to register it and assign it to public prosecutor Jovan Cvetanovski,” said Daniella Lape, an employee in the Skopje Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office. Her testimony is included in the oversight report.

At the Court of Appeal hearing on April 9, 2024, high prosecutor Cvetanovski withdrew the appeal.

“An inspection of the official note dated April 9, 2024 shows that the public prosecutor analyzed the evidence attached to the indictment, which is contrary to the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, Articles 336 and 337, given the stage of the proceedings in which the case was at the time,” the oversight report states.

This interpretation is consistent with the Supreme Court's legal opinion issued on December 7, 2021, which states that the Council responsible for reviewing an indictment does not analyze the evidence or assess its quality. Its role is limited to determining whether evidence has been obtained unlawfully — an issue that should have been the focus of Cvetanovski’s argument.

“A judgment of the Supreme Court of the Republic of North Macedonia was issued in this case on September 11, 2024. In that ruling, the court established a violation of the law in favor of the defendants. The judgment further states that the violation committed by the Council reviewing the indictment could have been remedied if the high public prosecutor had not withdrawn the appeal,” the oversight document notes.

In their conclusions regarding this case, the public prosecutors Lile Stefanova and Elvin Veli wrote that by withdrawing the appeal, prosecutor Cvetanovski did not act professionally, competently, or in accordance with the law. They further stated that he engaged in an analysis of evidence and the existence of intent to commit a criminal offense — matters that fall within the exclusive authority of the court. Nevertheless, the public prosecutor Dzelal Bajrami again took the position that Jovan Cvetanovski had acted within the scope of his authority.

The fourth case selected for additional scrutiny also involved the prosecutor assigned Roman numeral II — Jovan Cvetanovski. At first glance, it appeared routine: a case concerning the illegal serving of alcoholic beverages to a minor.

The court in Negotino found Gjorgji Lazov, Ilija Vangelov, and the company DPTU “S.O.S. Obezbeduvanje (Security)” DOO Negotino guilty. The defendants challenged the verdict, filing an appeal that moved the case to the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office in Skopje.

On February 3, 2023, the Skopje Court of Appeal overturned the ruling and returned the case for retrial. Prosecutor Jovan Cvetanovski did not attend the public hearing at the appellate court, despite the fact that the Higher Prosecutor’s Office in Skopje had previously concluded that the defendants’ appeals were unfounded.

Gjorgji Lazov and the company “SOS Obezbeduvanje (Security)” were also linked to an investigation by the Prosecutor’s Office for the Prosecution of Organized Crime and Corruption in the “Chain” case involving alleged tax evasion. Lazov later pleaded guilty alongside three other individuals. On May 14, 2024, he received a suspended sentence, according to reporting by the Prizma portal.

On May 8, 2023, the court in Negotino issued a new verdict, again finding the defendants guilty. The defendants once more appealed the decision.

“On August 23, 2023, the public prosecutor at the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office in Skopje, Jovan Cvetanovski, submitted a written proposal KOŽ.no. 1187/23 to the Skopje Court of Appeal, proposing that the defendants’ appeals be rejected as unfounded,” the oversight report states.

In that submission, Cvetanovski argued that the retrial had been conducted in accordance with the appellate court’s instructions and that the deficiencies identified in the initial proceedings had been fully addressed.

Yet only months later, his position shifted.

“At the hearing on 26 December 2023, the public prosecutor withdrew the indictment. From the review of the Skopje Court of Appeal’s judgment, it is evident that no new evidence was presented during the hearing and nothing altered the factual situation compared to the moment when the written proposal had been submitted,” the oversight report notes.

On the same day — December 26, 2023 — Cvetanovski drafted an official note stating that he had withdrawn the indictment because there was insufficient evidence to support the criminal offense.

The three prosecutors who conducted the oversight — Lile Stefanova, Elvin Veli, and Dzhelal Bajrami — reached a rare point of consensus regarding this decision. In earlier cases examined during the oversight, Bajrami had taken the view that Cvetanovski’s actions fell within his legal authority. In this instance, however, he concluded otherwise.

“Public prosecutors Lile Stefanova, Elvin Veli and Dzhelal Bajrami believe that, taking into account the written proposals in both proceedings and the positions expressed in them, and in a situation where no new evidence was presented at the main hearing, by dropping the indictment the public prosecutor did not act professionally, expertly and legally,” the oversight report states.

Despite this joint assessment, the 20-page oversight report ultimately carried only two signatures — those of Lile Stefanova and Elvin Veli.Dzhelal Bajrami did not sign the document, which was later submitted to then–State Public Prosecutor Ljupco Kocevski.

Attached to the report were Bajrami’s own official note, as well as a separate report from five employees describing how Mustafa Hajrullahi, while serving as head of the office, allegedly pressured them over the registration and allocation of cases within the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office in Skopje.