I recently received an anonymous letter to my media outlet, Spletni časopis (Online Newspaper), about the Trenta trial in Celje, which was not sent only to me, and which also contains court documents. I do not normally publish anonymous letters. However, since this is a notorious case of a trial against a politician – Janez Janša, against whom we have already witnessed dramatic abuses of justice on several occasions, both in the previous regime (the JBTZ trial) and after the collapse of the socialist dictatorship (the Patria case), with the aim of influencing who will be in power, and where the abusers have usually been rewarded, I am publishing the letter in its entirety. As it was sent to me. With all the documents that were attached. The only thing I have removed from the anonymous letter is a sentence that speaks of purely intimate matters that are not really important.
This may also be manipulation. But it is not right to cover up something so important, in light of what is going on. We journalists have no serious means of checking whether something like this is true or not, because in the courts, the court files and all the documentation, even the rulings, are being withheld from us, on the grounds that they have to protect the privacy and that the media and the public have no right to know what is going on there.
In any case, on Tuesday, the 15th of April, at noon, there will certainly be a tense atmosphere in front of the Celje court, where the final reading and the handing down of the indictment in the Trenta case will take place. People are organising themselves and will once again come to Celje in even greater numbers to continue their resistance against the unjust verdicts. Not only against Janez Janša, but against all those who are being wrongly judged by the courts.
The letter reads as follows:
“For many years, I worked at Prešernova Street in Celje. At the court. I know all the people there, from the doormen to the President of the Higher Court. The court is both big and small. Big in the number of employees and the number of cases handled, small in the things that remain hidden. We, the employees of the courts in Celje, used to know everything that went on there. Who would be convicted and who would be acquitted, who intervened for whom and who was untouchable – no matter the cost. The last clerk knew who was with whom, who was getting divorced, who was willing to go to bed with their supervisor for a promotion – or for any other reason – in which office, in which holiday house, and when. Everyone talked to everyone about it, boasted or told on others in one way or another, and in the end, we all knew. Everybody knew everything about everybody, so it did not often happen that private bedroom affairs ended up in the press.
It was only when I left there that it gradually dawned on me what a nest it was. The rule of law? Trial by law and justice? Come on. Instead, it was the very image of Sodom and Gomorrah. And the Dachau trials. All in one. One such typical, classic example is the Šoštanj Thermal Power Plant – TEŠ6 trial. In the investigation stage already, we received instruction as to which of those involved should not be prosecuted, under any circumstances. They were not to be mentioned or summoned to court, not even as witnesses. And we were told not to hurry. This left the most important players of the Velenje clan of the all-powerful outside the scope of prosecution. In the face of a pile of incriminating publicly disclosed facts and watertight evidence. This is where the influence of the former and current Minister of Justice, Andrea Katič, first appeared. Everyone in the Court knew why she first became Justice Minister. Probably the strongest motive for her to become the Minister of Justice a second time is still the TEŠ6 trial. I know a lot of details about the (farcical) TEŠ6 trial, but more on that another time.
I am sending you this insider’s view because of something that has turned the Celje District Court, together with the Celje Higher Court, into the most important court in the country. It began a decade ago when, formally because of local jurisdiction, but in fact not only because of that, politician Janša began to be tried in this court. If I remember correctly, at least 20 or more cases against him were brought before the court at various stages in the last 10 years, ranging from the more high-profile cases, such as the one where he called two journalists prostitutes and the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption (KPK) cases, to cases that did not have as much publicity. Janša was always found guilty and convicted at both levels of the Celje courts, but later on, the Supreme Court overturned some of these judgments, or they became time-barred, but I have not followed everything in detail. There was so much going on that I do not even remember it all, but some of my colleagues started referring to the Celje court as the Janša court. The preferred political option of the vast majority of the employees of all the courts in Celje is strongly left-wing, especially among the female judges. There are only a handful of male judges there. They are all left-wing, too. None of the female judges hide this, either. They talk openly at coffee breaks and in their offices about who should be ‘fucked over’. The same is true of the rest of the staff, most of whom are related by kinship or otherwise. There is practically no one there, or there are very few, who did not get the job there because of personal connections. And they especially enjoy it when they have to take revenge on one of their own for, as they say, treason. The trial of their former colleague Radonjić in handcuffs is the latest such publicly obvious example.
Just before the last elections, sometime in early 2022, we began hearing talk in the offices that Janša should be condemned by any means necessary. And a series of hearings were called practically overnight due to the private lawsuits of two female journalists, even though it was not a matter of any urgency, or even though there were much more difficult cases at the court that had long been awaiting trial. I was no longer employed at the court at the time, but my former colleagues would tell me the details of the trial with great gusto and giggle happily at the announcements of what Janša’s sentence would be. It was clear that he would be convicted the moment the case was assigned to Judge Jazbinšek. We used to hang out quite a lot, and at least a dozen times, even in larger crowds, she explained how she couldn’t stand him.
The same happened before the elections to the European Parliament last year, when the Trenta trial against Janša was announced. Once again, he became the most interesting topic among the judges. This time, the person chosen for his ‘execution’ was a former police officer, Cvetka Posilovič. She was not considered to be the brightest in court, but she is reliable and consistently carries out what she is ordered to do, and she also dares to impose the highest possible sentences, even in trivial cases. Moreover, everyone knew that she was being held in at least two cases. In the disciplinary proceedings against her husband, she represented him, which, as a judge, she should not have done, but they overlooked that. The more serious case is corruption in the purchase of agricultural land of the first category for a ridiculous price, for which her husband, a clerk at the municipality of Zreče, then obtained a change of use to building land, on which they then built a rather luxurious house with a solar power plant. At the same time, on the salary of a police officer and later a judge, and on the salary of a municipal clerk, they bought (at least) two more flats in Ljubljana. I started looking through the land register after I read in the media why exactly it is Posilovič who is the judge in the Janša case. After 15 years, he supposedly sold the property in Trenta for more than he had bought it for. Hm. How much has the price of the agricultural land on which Judge Posilovič’s house stands risen since the change of use of land? She certainly did not wait 15 years for that. In defence of some of my former colleagues from the court, I would add that some of them remarked that Cvetka was not the most suitable person for the job because of her well-known position, which would become public sooner or later. However, I am quite surprised – or perhaps I am not – that the Slovenian media have not published any information about this anywhere, even though this is all publicly available data that can be found in the land registry. Or perhaps they have published it, and I just haven’t noticed it.
In connection with the selection of Cvetka Posilovič as the judge who will sentence Janša, it is probably needless to add that she was not the next in line for this trial, but the judge who was in line recused herself with the absurd excuse that her husband was a classmate of Janša’s wife 30 years ago. Everyone laughed at that. It is probably also needless to say that both lay judges were not supposed to be part of the trial, either. I do not know the man, but everyone in the court knows that the female lay judge, Suzana Žinić, is the best friend of Minister Andreja Katič, and that she is assigned exclusively to chambers where there is a higher interest at stake. She is also one of the few lay judges who is not a retiree, but who holds the responsible post of Head of the Legal Service of the Municipality of Velenje, where she was, of course, appointed by Minister Katič when the latter was still the Director there. Where does Suzana Žinić get the time to sit in court for days on end while her responsible job at the municipality waits for her? It is probably also not known to the public that the financial remuneration of lay judges is very minor compared to the lavish salaries of judges today, and that this is why the lists are mostly made up of retirees. What, then, is the motive of Žinić’s employer for allowing her to be permanently absent from work, and what is Žinić’s own motive for being on the list of lay judges? The question at the end is redundant, because there is not a judge in the Celje courts who is not aware of the Katič-Zinić connection. By the way, because the value of houses, plots of land, flats and real estate in general, as well as the property of politicians, is already being discussed in court – why is it never checked how those judges and prosecutors who are promoted through the normal procedures got their property? Or how did Minister Katič, her relatives and the rest of the Velenje clan, who are not being tried for corruption in the construction of TEŠ6, despite the existing evidence, get their hands on luxury real estate?
As I was absent on sick leave for a long time, I did not follow the trial against Janša last year until a former colleague, when we met briefly, told me, all excited, that Janša would finally be convicted before the New Year. I called the only person in the court who I know who is not left-wing, although they cleverly hide it, and they confirmed the news. That the verdict is practically in its final stages and that Judge Cvetka has a USB stick on which those above her have written a watertight explanation of the convictions that will survive both the scrutiny of the higher court and the Supreme Court. And that everything is as it should be and tightly coordinated. Somewhere around the same time, protests started happening outside the court. It was a great shock for many of the employees, because there had never been anything like it in Celje before. They were expecting about 50 of Janša’s neglected sheep, as some of them joked, saying that this would be a reprise of those constant protests in front of the Ljubljana court when Janša was imprisoned because of the Patria trial. But then the street in front of the court was packed and very loud. Which came as quite a shock for some. A few days after the protest, I met one of my older colleagues who told me that she had now gone to read the indictment against Janša for the first time and that she couldn’t help but be surprised at how hollow it was and wondered what the prosecution was thinking if it expected to be able to sentence someone because of what was written there. She noted that she understands the higher interests behind all of this, but that they could have at least come up with something better.
A few days later, my confidante from the court told me that the decision had been taken to postpone the sentencing date from before New Year to the 1st of May holidays. And that they were also considering the option of acquitting the accused now, but then, on appeal by the prosecution, having the acquittal overturned by the Higher Court and converted into a conviction, or, depending on the situation, returning the case for a retrial, which could then start all over again with all the media hype two months before the next elections. However, the instruction came from the higher-ups – that the judgment must already be a conviction at the first instance court. But not before the 1st of May holidays.
So that the matter can be dragged out a bit and the protests diluted. Who is going to come to Celje every week to protest? It has become common practice in high-profile cases in Slovenian courts for judgments to be handed down just before the holidays, when people are already on holiday and travelling – although it is not a practice that the public pays attention to. In a longer conversation, my confidante shared a number of details about the Trenta trial. In summary, based on second-hand but well-informed information and logical reasoning, I can say the following:
a) The Trenta trial is fully planned and controlled from the first move onwards.
b) It is being directed by the very top of the state judiciary and the prosecutor’s office.
c) All those directly involved, including prosecutors and judges, have been promised full protection, reward and promotion. The willingness to follow instructions from the top has also increased sharply in the courts with the recent bold increase in judges’ salaries.
d) Coordination with politics and information is channelled through Minister Katič in the judiciary, and through the Boštjan Valenčič-Darja Šlibar-Nika Podakar-Robert Golob alliance in the prosecution service.
e) Judge Posilovič, Prosecutor Valenčič, and probably also the head of the Slovenian Sovereign Holding (SDH) Šlibar and Minister Katič are kept informed of all planned moves of the defence of the accused. The defence lawyer of the first defendant, Branko Kastelic, Gorazd Fišer, is a former prosecutor. He is very left-wing. He is in regular contact with Prosecutor Valenčič and occasionally with his superior. And with his colleagues from the prosecutor’s office in Celje and from the General Prosecutor’s Office. The accused Klemen Gantar also has a defence lawyer from the Kozinc law firm, where they traditionally work with the left-wing authorities.
f) There is a lot of mockery happening at coffee meetings of the judges of the genius of the choice of defence counsel or the incredible naivety of the two first defendants in their choice of counsel. We all know who Gorazd Fišer is. The only obstacle is Janša’s defence lawyer, Matoz, who is not important and cannot even technically prevent a conviction, since Janša is cunningly accused of helping to cause the damage allegedly caused by Kastelic. Ergo, if Kastelic is convicted, Janša is automatically convicted as well.
After the New Year, my confidante has been filling me in with information, much of which I have also received in chance meetings with former colleagues from the left, who have no qualms about explaining everything that the judges say to each other. The latest information, including today’s, is as follows:
g) Janša and the other two will certainly be convicted at first instance, and the sentence will be confirmed by the higher court in Celje.
After the New Year, my confidante has been updating me with information, much of it from chance meetings with former colleagues from the left, who have no qualms about talking about everything the judges say to each other. The latest information, including today’s, is as follows:
h) The latest draft of the sentence has been coordinated for a month with the judges of the Higher Court, who are scheduled to sit on the appeal chamber, which will be headed either by the President of the Court, Branko Aubreht, or by the Senior Judge, Barbara Žumer Kunc. Both of them have stated many times at different events that “they cannot stand Janša”. Aubreht, although with a more selected vocabulary [reporter’s note: part of the text has been removed because it is of a personal nature], has also publicly proclaimed his aversion, sometimes with unusual hostility, to a politician he has already tried several times, in pubs in Celje, and there are many who still remember what he said because of how vulgar he was in his expression.
i) Last week, there was a rumour going around the District Court that the sentencing, which was scheduled for the 17th or 18th of April, was to be postponed until the 24th or 25th of April, meaning it would happen between Easter and the 1st of May holidays, when people would be focusing on more pleasant things, instead of the sentencing of a politician. But then, for some reason, the original date was suddenly deemed more appropriate.
j) This is also supported by the latest draft judgment, which I am attaching in the form and quantity that I have received it. It bears the date of the 15th of April, the date of the last hearing in court, with closing arguments by the prosecution and the defence. It is possible that they intend to deliver their judgment on the same day, although the usual date for delivery of the judgment is one of the three days following the closing arguments.
k) As you can see from the draft judgment, Cvetka Posilovič remains faithful to her reputation for strict compliance with the instructions from above and for the imposition of drastic sentences. Kastelic will get three and a half years, Gantar and Janša 2 years and 2 months. In a case that is trivial, even if the allegations were true. In fact, in this same court, sentences for cases with ten or 50 times the amount of money from this case are much lower. The more important personalities were acquitted anyway, and the most important ones were not even allowed to be called as witnesses in the TEŠ6 trial.
I will not write my name below, although I know I will be found out quickly. I want them to work for it at least a little. After all, I do not care. I have never voted for Janša in my life. But I voted for his party for the first time in the European elections last year. I voted for the young Zala Tomašič. Before that, I voted for Kučan, then Drnovšek, Pahor and Cerar. Not Jankovič. Ever since I left court, I had not gone to the polls until last year. Although I regret it today. The fact that I was blind for too long. And that I kept silent. I decided to change that when I started following what they were doing to my former colleague Zvezdan Radonjić. Who, like me, was a leftist. Even more of a leftist, an outspoken defender of socialism. But it did not help him once he decided to judge by conscience and not by instruction. From above. The superiors in court never say who gave the instruction. It came from above, they say. Sometimes, not even that. They point their finger somewhere upwards, towards the ceiling. And everyone understands. We all understand what it means. Even who is the person above. We talk about it afterwards when we’re having coffee. And nobody resists. Until today. To be continued. The disease is progressing, and I have nothing more to lose.”
The translation of the verdict that was attached to the above letter can be read in its entirety below.
“VERDICT
IN THE NAME OF THE PEOPLE
The District Court in Celje, in a panel composed of District Judge Cvetka Posilovič as President of the panel and lay judges Andrej Volk and Suzana Žinić as members of the panel,
assisted by Gabrijela Vogrinčič, Recorder
in the criminal case against the defendants BRANKO KASTELIC, defended by lawyer Gorazd Fišer from Ljubljana, KLEMEN GANTAR, defended by lawyer Martina Žaucer Hrovatin from Kozinc and Partners Law Firm, d.o.o. from Ljubljana, IVAN JANŠA, defended by lawyer Franci Matoz from the Matoz Law Firm, d.o.o. from Koper,
BRANKO KASTELIC, for the offence of abuse of position or rights pursuant to the first and second paragraph of Article 244 of the Criminal Code, KLEMEN GANTAR and IVAN JANŠA, for the offence of aiding and abetting the offence of abuse of position or rights pursuant to the first and second paragraph of Article 244 of the Criminal Code, in conjunction with Article 27 of the Criminal Code,
under indictment of the Specialised Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Slovenia, No. Kt/331/2013 of the 1st of October 2020, modified on the 2nd of April 2025,
after hearings held on the 9.7.2024, 3.9.2024, 17.9.2024, 26.9.2024, 8.10.2024, 15.10.2024, 22.10.2024, 26.11.2024, 6.12.2024, 12.12.2024, 19.12.2024, 17.1.2025, 10.2.2025, 17.2.2025, 10.3.2025, 25.3.2025, 8.4.2025, 15.4.2025, in the presence of the accused Branko Kastelic, his defence lawyer Gorazd Fišer, Klemen Gantar, his defence lawyer Martina Hrovatin, Ivan Janša and his defence lawyer Franci Matoz,
on the 15th of April 2025
RULES:
1. The defendant BRANKO KASTELIC,
no alias, born 22.1.1955 in Ljubljana, personal identification number: 2201955500248, permanent residence at Veliko Mlačevo 6i, Grosuplje, citizen of the Republic of Slovenia, university graduate in economics, retired, married, father of two children aged 35 and 25, one of whom he supports, graduate of the Faculty of Economics, with a monthly pension of EUR 1,6000.00, receives EUR 160.00 from the supplementary pension insurance, receives EUR 300.00 from renting out a studio flat in Ljubljana, owner of a house at Kuželjevec 15, owner of a studio flat in Ljubljana, in Trubarjev kvart, not yet convicted, not undergoing any other criminal proceedings,
2. the defendant KLEMEN GANTAR
no alias, born 20.6.1963 in Ljubljana, personal identification number: 2006963500454, permanent residence at Režiška cesta 16, Logatec, citizen of the Republic of Slovenia, civil engineer, employee of GKMB d.o.o., Clevlandska 49, Ljubljana, married, father of three children whom he does not support, graduate of the Higher School of Civil Engineering, monthly salary of EUR 1,200.00 gross and pension supplement of EUR 860.00, co-owner of half the property at the address of residence, owner of a passenger car WV Passat, year 2005, not yet convicted, no other criminal proceedings,
3. the defendant IVAN JANŠA
no alias, born 17.9.1958 in Ljubljana, personal identification number: 1709958500133, permanent residence at Silova 13, Velenje, citizen of the Republic of Slovenia, graduated in defence studies, member of the National Assembly, married, father of four children, of whom he has parental obligations towards two, graduate of the Faculty of Defence Studies, receives a parliamentary salary of EUR 2,800.00 net, with occasional royalties, owner of a house at his residence address,
co-owner of an apartment in Ljubljana, owner of a holiday house in Bovec, already convicted before the District Court in Celje, by judgment IV K 33524/2021, for the offence of defamation under the second paragraph, in conjunction with the first paragraph of Article 159 of the Criminal Code, sentencing him to a fine, is not the subject of another criminal proceeding,
are found guilty,
because
Branko Kastelic took advantage of his position in the course of his economic activity with the intention of obtaining a substantial pecuniary advantage for Ivan Janša, without any other criminal offence being established, and with the intention of obtaining such a pecuniary advantage for someone else, and Klemen Gantar and Ivan Janša intentionally assisted him in the commission of the criminal offence, namely;
Branko Katelic, between the 31st of March 2005 and the 30th of July 2007, in Ljubljana, as director of the company Imos, d.d. Ljubljana, Fajfarjeva 33, Ljubljana (hereinafter Imos d.d.), in the management of its activities in the field of design, engineering, technical consulting and construction, with the intention of obtaining a large pecuniary advantage for Ivan Janša in the amount of at least SIT 26,576,735.00 (110,902.75 EUR), contrary to the provisions of the first paragraph of Article 258 of the Companies Act and Article 34 of the Articles of Association of Imos d.d., which required him to act in the best interests of the company with the diligence of a conscientious and honest businessman, as he disregarded the interests of Imos d.d., which he represented, and acted to its detriment and to the benefit of Ivan Janša,
after having concluded on the 31st of March 2005 the Sales Contract No: 2504000133250 with Ivan Janša as the buyer regarding the sale of an apartment at Komemnskega ulica 34 in Ljubljana for a purchase price of SIT 56,582,772.16 (EUR 236,115.73), provided Ivan Janša, to the detriment of the company Imos d.d., with a pecuniary advantage from which Ivan Janša paid the second instalment of the purchase price of SIT 131.390,59 EUR, which he did by first providing funds to the company Eurogradnje d.o.o. for the purchase of real estate from Ivan Janša, by concluding Contract No: 005/2005 of the 4th of April 2005 for the construction of a building in Fiesa, on the basis of which Imos d.d. on the 3rd of May 2005 transferred to Eurogradnje d.o.o. the amount of SIT 47,973,285.58 (EUR 200 188,97) as “advance payment under Contract No. 005/2005 of 4.4.2005 for the construction of a building in Fiesa”, although this was not an advance payment, but rather a payment of SIT 47.973.285,58 (EUR 200 188,97) to Eurogradnje d.o.o. for the purchase of real estate from Ivan Janša in Trenta, since Imos d.d. settled all 13 invoices issued for provisional situations for the construction of the Fiesa building, totalling SIT 260.195.075,91 (EUR 1.085.774,81) at that time, and then on the 15th of September 2006, it received from Eurogradnje d.o.o. Robova cesta 6, Vrhnika, which on the 20th of July 2005 purchased from Ivan Janša the real estate in Trenta, with plot Nos: 23, 24, 26, 27, 28
in two instalments, on the 21st of September 2006 in the amount of SIT 31,542,777.90 (EUR 131,625.68) and on the 30th of March 2007 in the amount of
EUR 14,625.07, while the real estate was only worth EUR 20,367.00, which Branko Kastelic knew, since the valuation report No 2/2003-KGN of the forensic appraiser Nikolaja Gilčvert Kogovšek, an employee of Imos d.d., was made on behalf of the company Imos d.d., and she estimated the value of the property at EUR 20,367.00, while stating in the report that all the land is located in the Triglav National Park, which is an area under special protection pursuant to the Triglav National Park Act, in which it was and still is prohibited to build individual holiday houses or apartments and the land is not equipped with municipal infrastructure, is not connected by road, and is not connected to the electricity, water and sewage networks, and no preliminary study was carried out at the time of purchase of the property indicating the reasonable business use and the economic calculation of the justification for the purchase, and no investment programme was drawn up,
which means that Branko Kastelic thereby obtained a significant material benefit for Ivan Janša in the amount of at least SIT 26,576,735.00 (EUR 110,902.75), which represents the difference between the purchase price he received for the real estate in Trenta from Imos d.d. through Eurogradnje d.o.o. (EUR 131,269.75) and the actual value of these properties (EUR 20,367.00), and he also obtained a pecuniary advantage for Eurogradnje d.o.o. in the amount of EUR 14,981.00, representing the difference between the purchase price paid by Imos d.d. for the real estate in Trenta to Eurogradnje d.o.o. (EUR 146,250.75) and the amount paid to Ivan Janša (EUR 131,269.75), and at the same time, he also harmed Imos d.d. by at least SIT 30,166,781.85 (EUR 125,883.75), which represents the difference between the purchase price paid by Imos d.d. for the real estate in Trenta to Eurogradnje d.o.o. (EUR 146,250.75) and the actual value of the real estate in Trenta purchased by Imos d.d. (EUR 20,367.00).
Ivan Janša and Klemen Gantar, in turn, intentionally assisted Branko Katelic in the execution of this deal by having Ivan Janša, as the seller, and Klemen Gantar, as the agent of the buyer, Eurogradnje d.o.o., on the 20th of July 2025, at Brinje I/5, Grosuplje, for the purpose of concealing the manner of settlement of the second instalment of the purchase price for the apartment at Komenskega 34 in Ljubljana, conclude a contract of sale in respect of immovable property in Trenta with plot nos.: 23, 24, 26, 27, 28, 31/1, 31/2 and 33, with entry no. 10, all in the area of Trenta, with a total area of 15,473 m2 – the actual area is 15,613 m2 – at a price of EUR 8,5 per sqm, for a total of SIT 31,457,482.00 (EUR 131,269.75), the amount of the second instalment of the purchase price, and Klemen Gantar, acting on behalf of Eurogradnje d.o.o., with Imos d.d. on the 15th of September 2006, signed a sale agreement in respect to the above-mentioned real estate in Trenta, while both Ivan Janša and Klemen Gantar knew that the actual purchaser of Ivan Janša’s real estate in Trenta was […]
the purchase price of SIT 35,047,531.00 (EUR 146,250.75), all in order to provide Ivan Janša with the second instalment of the purchase price for the apartment at Komenskega 34 in Ljubljana, amounting to EUR 131,269.75, and Klemen Gantar and Ivan Janša knew that the market value of the real estate in Trenta was significantly lower than the price of SIT 31,457,482.00 (EUR 131,269.75), as Klemen Gantar was aware of the Location Information for Real Estate Trade No. 640- 350-06/05-101 of the 30th of March 2005, which indicated that the properties in question were located in the Triglav National Park, which is an area under special protection pursuant to the Triglav National Park Act, where it was and still is prohibited to build
individual holiday houses or apartments, and that the land was not equipped with municipal infrastructure, was not connected to a road and was not connected to the electricity, water and sewage networks, and Ivan Janša also knew that the market value of the real estate sold in Trenta on the 20th of July 2005 was significantly lower than SIT 31,457,482.00 (EUR 131,269.75), as he had bought the real estate from Ivan Cuder at a price of SIT 1,100,00.00 between the 29th of June 1992 and the 31st of July 1992, and he was informed of the restrictions on building on the properties on the basis of the Location Information No 647-350-06/03, relating to the properties in Trenta, obtained on the 6th of October 2003, and in September 2001, he bought a house with a garden at Zavrzelno 11, Bovec (plot No 6799/1 and 6799/2, Bovec), which was provided with utilities, connected to the electricity grid and heated, and three additional plots totalling 5913m2, and paid EUR 51,076.60 for the house (net floor area of the building 139.2m2) with a garden (119m2) and EUR 9,672.80 for the three additional plots, i.e. a significantly lower price than for the land sold in Trenta, which is located in the Triglav National Park, an area under special protection pursuant to the Triglav National Park Act, where it was and still is prohibited to build individual holiday houses or apartments, and where the land is not equipped with municipal infrastructure, has no road connection, and is not connected to the electricity, water and sewage networks.
The accused Branko Kastelic thus committed the offence of abuse of position or rights under the first and second paragraphs of Article 244 of the Criminal Code, while Klemen Gantar and Ivan Janša aided and abetted the offence of abuse of position or rights under the first paragraph of Article 244 of the Criminal Code,
for which
1. On the basis of the second paragraph of Article 244 of the Criminal Code, the sentence imposed on the accused Branko Kastelic shall be as follows
3 (years) and 6 (six) months’ imprisonment.
2. on the basis of the second paragraph of Article 244 of the Criminal Code, in conjunction with Article 27 of the Criminal Code, the sentence imposed on defendant Klemen Gantar shall be as follows
2 (two) years and 2 (two) months’ imprisonment.
3. on the basis of the second paragraph of Article 244 of the Criminal Code, the sentence imposed on defendant Ivan Janša shall be as follows
2 (two) years and 2 (two) months’ imprisonment.
Pursuant to the first and third paragraphs of Article 95 of the Criminal Procedure Act, the accused Branko Kastelic, Klemen Gantar and Ivan Janša shall be liable to pay the costs of the criminal proceedings referred to in points 1 to 5 in the second paragraph of Article 92 of the Criminal Procedure Act and shall also be liable to pay the court fee referred to in point 6 of the second paragraph of Article 92 of the Criminal Procedure Act, which shall be levied by a payment order in accordance with the Court Fees Act.
Pursuant to the first paragraph of Article 97 of the Criminal Procedure Act, the defendants Branko Kastelic, Klemen Gantar and Ivan Janša shall each bear the fees and necessary expenses of the authorised defence counsel.
EXPLANATION:
The Specialised State Prosecutor’s Office filed an indictment against the defendants Branko Kastelic, Klemen Gantar and Ivan Janša under the number Kt/331/2013 dated the 1st of October 2020, which was modified on the 2nd of April 2025. In the indictment, the Specialised State Prosecutor’s Office accused the defendant Branko Kastelic of committing the crime of abuse of office or rights under the first and second paragraph of Article 244 of the Criminal Code, and the defendants Klemen Gantar and Ivan Janša of aiding and abetting in the commission of the offence of abuse of position or rights under the first and second paragraph of Article 244 of the Criminal Code, in connection with Article 27 of the Criminal Code.
Peter Jančič, Spletni časopis
