This week’s guest on the show “Who Is Lying to You” (“Kdo vam laže”) on Nova24TV was Brane Kastelic, the first defendant in the Trenta case. So far, he has not had much opportunity to explain his side of the story to the public, or his view on this notorious and much-talked-about topic. On Nova24TV, he spoke out and revealed the many dirty details of the trial.
Brane Kastelic, former director of the Imos company, said that the prosecution accused him of abusing his position to sign a contract for the purchase of a property in Trenta, thus causing financial damage to the company “in the amount of at least 125 thousand euros”. Kastelic said that this accusation had no basis, which he further explained.
“This accusation is, of course, based on nothing, so to speak, because the statute is very clear when it comes to abuse of power. This claim of abuse of power started with the accusation that the Supervisory Board of Imos did not decide on this property – of course it did not decide on it; it also did not decide on much bigger matters, and this property represented two thousandths, two per mille of the total stock of the Imos Group, which at the time amounted to between 80 and 90 million euros, and this was confirmed by all the members of the Supervisory Board at the time,” said Kastelic, who added that this was also evident from other documents and that the purchase was made according to the procedure that was in force in the company at the time.
The part of the indictment that alleges that damages were caused is also built on a shaky foundation, Kastelic said, because the property or land, which covers 15 thousand square metres, was bought for around 140 thousand euros. “That was nine euros per square metre, that is to say, it was very cheap, just as the person who proposed it to the College wrote at the time, meaning that it was worth buying, even if it was going to be in stock for a long time. This property was later also sold – admittedly at a 10, I mean between 10 and 13 percent cheaper in bankruptcy,” explained Kastelic, who believes that the charge of damage could therefore be at most around 18 thousand euros, and not the 125 thousand euros that the indictment accuses him of. The criminal indictment was brought forth by the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption (KPK), and it “based the value of the damage on the Surveying and Mapping Authority of the Republic of Slovenia’s generalised land value assessment, which valued the property at 20 thousand euros,” Kastelic added.
The affair arose because of the new web application created by the Surveying and Mapping Authority, which somehow valued a plot of land in Trenta at only 20 thousand euros, while Imos bought it for around 140 thousand euros. Regarding the claim that the app was not very realistic when it comes to the value of the properties on the market, he explained that at the time, he had obtained data on other purchases made by Imos, compared them with the Surveying and Mapping Authority’s estimates, and in 14 cases, it turned out that the actual prices that were paid were multiple times as high as the estimates of the Surveying and Mapping Authority. “They were significantly higher, ranging from 8 times to a high of just under 300 times higher. The one in Trenta was around 7 times higher,” he pointed out, adding that he had already shown just how misguided the estimates were at the time. He believes that the appraisers and the prosecutor agree, because no one is pointing this out anymore. He also mentioned a personal transaction where he had paid 100 thousand euros for agricultural land near Grosuplje, whereas according to Gurs, the estimated value of it was only one thousand euros.
Given that Imos was a large company that owned a lot of real estate, the presenter of the show, Boris Tomašič, asked the guest whether he had been prosecuted for any other real estate, to which Kastelic replied that he had not.
Three appraisers, all prices well over 100 thousand euros
Kastelic also explained the story of the different appraisers and the different valuations. The first valuation of the property in Trenta was 110 thousand euros, the second 133 thousand, and the third one, made by appraiser Salobir, was 143 thousand euros. The accused was initially optimistic, as there were no objections to his performance during the 2014 investigation. The affair went quiet for a few months, and he believed that the case would not go to court and that there would be no hearings. Then, with the bankruptcy of Imos, a turning point occurred. The spotlight was shone on the story that the property was valued at 17 thousand euros by the appraiser Breda Zorko for the purposes of the bankruptcy, which was the basis for the renewed prosecution of Kastelic, Janez Janša and the former director of the company Eurogradnje.
Kastelic pointed out that the court then appointed one commission. This valuation was made after a public auction had been held on the basis of this valuation, which amounted to 17 thousand euros. The valuation of the first commission was somewhere around the level of the bankruptcy valuation, meaning, around 20 thousand euros. However, this commission was subsequently disqualified, not because of any substantive objections, but because this commission was somehow deemed to be politically incorrect. A second commission was appointed, and in 2018, it made a new valuation, very similar to the previous one. As he pointed out, one of the members of this second commission was a relative of a member of the first commission.
Tomašič then pointed out that Breda Zorko also appeared in the case of the dilapidated building on Litijska Street, which was supposed to be used as new court premises, “where she did two appraisals in three years, one for 2,500 euros, then 8 thousand, for a building that was just falling into disrepair throughout this time. Did you ask what happened to Litijska?” asked the presenter. “Yes, one lawyer asked, but the court did not allow this question,” Kastelic replied.
Criticism of property valuation procedures
Kastelic went on to criticise the procedures for the valuation of real estate in the Trenta Valley and their use in the legal proceedings against Janez Janša. As he explained, the appraisers always state at the outset that the market price is the price at which the seller and the buyer are prepared to conclude the transaction. However, in this case, some of the appraisers valued the property significantly below the actual market value. 18 auctioneers initially considered that the value of the property was significantly higher than the appraised values. Five of them were willing to pay up to 100 thousand euros for it, and the property was sold for 124 thousand euros in the end. The judiciary and the prosecution ignored the fact that some of the valuations were clearly too low. Valuations ranged from 20 thousand to 140 thousand euros, with the lower ones based on transactions dating back to the economic crisis.
Kastelic also pointed to irregularities in the valuation process – the appraisers who valued the property at lower prices only took into account the cheapest transactions, did not value building land separately, and did not take into account real market trends. Regarding the accusations against Janša, Kastelic explained that the prosecution claimed that the apartment on Trubarjeva Street was paid for from a hidden deal in Trenta, but that this theory was without any supporting evidence.
Janša allegedly received a “gift” of 131,000 euros, but even paid an extra 200 euros to the buyer, which sounds absurd. The Court of Audit has in the past warned of irregularities in the sale of state land at suspiciously low prices.
In his side of the story, Kastelic revealed specific data and prices, which were also used against him in the court proceedings.
Among other things, he believes that the data was manipulated, and you can see why he thinks so in the show that you can watch at the following link (in Slovenian): https://youtu.be/Si0OfmsjUiM
We kindly invite you to watch!
T. B.
