Dragan Lukač older than the law: By removing four Bosniaks from the candidate list, he also violated the FBiH Constitution

After the director-pensioner of the Federal Police Administration, Dragan Lukač, acted unlawfully and removed four Bosniaks from the proposed list of 15 most successful candidates and replaced them with Croats and one candidate who declared himself as other, legal experts conducted an analysis and determined which laws Lukač violated, reports the Patria agency.

The analysis was based on Lukač's denial of media reports in which he stated that he acted in accordance with the law.

Director Lukač, in his selection of candidates, referred to Articles 41, paragraph 1, 43, paragraph 1, items 2 and 4, and Article 11 of the Law on Internal Affairs of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (Official Gazette of FBiH 81/14) and Article 53, paragraph 3 of the Law on Police Officers of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (Official Gazette of FBiH numbers 27/05, 70/08 and 44/11).

Article 41, paragraph 1 states: "The Police Administration is managed by the director of the police administration."

This has absolutely nothing to do with the advertisement and recruitment of candidates who are not, and will not be until the end of their training, part of that Administration; therefore, it does not affect the selection of candidates for employment nor his management of the Administration.

Article 43, paragraph 1 states: "In managing the police administration, the police director performs the following tasks:

2) Independently plans, manages, supervises and directs the entire work of the police administration.

Lukač appointed the Commission for the Selection of Candidates, whose work he supervised and directed because the Commission is part of the Police Administration.

4) Participates in the drafting of regulations within the competence of the Police Administration.

The director drafted the "Rulebook on the method and schedule of candidate testing and the scoring system in the process of selecting police officers" number 09-8822 dated 11.08.2016, which he now violates with his actions, even though he prescribed it.

He also drafted the "Criteria on the method, manner and scoring system, candidate testing and physical fitness checks" number 09-8933 dated 11.08.2016, which he also does not respect because for employment he proposes candidates with a lower number of points earned in the tests he prescribed.

Article 11, which he also refers to, reads:

"The structure of employees of the Federal Ministry and the Police Administration reflects the national structure of the population according to the last valid census in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

This refers to employees in the Ministry and the Administration. Not to people who are just applying for a job. This article would not be disputed if the director did not refer to the census of the population of FBiH instead of BiH, and it is entirely disputed that this was not stated in the advertisement as a condition for employment, nor the structure of employees in the FUP, which candidates cannot know. Even in the form, it says that declaring on this basis is not mandatory. Therefore, if a candidate fills in nothing, on what basis would the director decide, or would he conclude it himself as he now decided who is who? And finally, which census is valid in BiH? The one from 1991 or this one from 2013?

And the last article Lukač refers to in his "rejection of candidates" is Article 53, paragraph 3, which states:

Appeal against the decision of the selection commission: (3) "Only after the Police Board decides on all submitted appeals will the manager approve the final list of all candidates proposed for employment."

Therefore, the list he approved is not final. He leaves it to the Police Board to decide, but even before that decision, he took the law into his own hands and determined the list, even though he corrected everything the commission did, and only after appeals could he, as director, have reacted, which is seen in this article in the word "manager." That this is so is shown by the articles of the Law and his rulebook, which he knowingly bypassed.

Article 51 of the Law on Police Officers (Official Gazette of FBiH number 27/05) explicitly prescribes the rules of the candidate selection procedure. Therefore, the Law, not the Rulebook adopted by the director, which is a bylaw. Paragraph 4 of this Law prescribes the obligations of the commission and the purpose of its existence:

Article 51 Rules of the selection procedure

(4) The Selection Commission:

a) determines the content of the tests from paragraph 2 of this article, with the approval of the manager;

b) determines the final result for each candidate based on the total sum of the results of each test;

c) issues a list of candidates who took the tests by decision;

d) proposes candidates with the highest number of points from the list under point c) of this paragraph, for employment in accordance with the advertised number of vacant positions.

The Director also bypasses Article 52, which obliges him to list the score list of candidates who completed the testing (which the commission did) and then the candidates proposed by the commission on that score list for employment.

Article 52 Notification

(1) The police authority publishes on its notice board the list with the results achieved on each test as well as the final results of all candidates who took the tests no later than thirty days from the day of the last testing. The score list also includes candidates who successfully completed the testing and candidates proposed for employment.

(2) A candidate who took the tests from Article 51, paragraph 2 of this Law has unimpeded access to the results of their tests.

Also, as a true "artist," the Director bypassed Article 35 of the Law on Internal Affairs of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (Official Gazette of FBiH 81/14), which states:

Article 35 Work of police officers

The work of police officers is subject to non-discrimination on any grounds such as gender, race, skin color, religion, ethnic or social origin, association with a national minority, political or other opinion, property, birth or other status.

Lukač committed direct discrimination according to this article, and in his denial, he refers to the "oath." The director is a police officer, isn't he?

Article 89 of the Law on Internal Affairs of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (Official Gazette of FBiH 81/14) in Article 89 Violations of official duties of the police director states:

4) Providing inaccurate data that affects the decision-making of competent authorities

7) Concealing facts about the manner of performing official tasks

11) Performing activities that are not in accordance with the interests of the Federal Ministry and the Police Administration, or which damage the reputation of the Federal Ministry and the Police Administration.

14) Issuing orders whose execution would constitute a criminal offense

15) Discriminating in the performance of duties based on race, skin color, gender, language, religion, political or other affiliation, national or social origin, or any other basis.

Lukač exceeded his authority and committed a disciplinary offense. Lukač knowingly bypassed complying with the articles of the law, thereby committing three criminal offenses:

- Arbitrariness (Article 370 of the Criminal Code of FBiH),

- Abuse of position or authority (Article 383 of the Criminal Code of FBiH) and

- Violation of equality in employment (Article 279 of the Criminal Code of FBiH)

and finally the Constitution of FBiH which in CHAPTER II Article 2 point d) literally states: "prohibition of all discrimination based on race, skin color, sex, language, religion or belief, political or other opinions, national and social origin" and thereby jeopardized the basic human right to work of four candidates by implementing precisely that discrimination.

Lukač's erasure of service years

According to the official website of the FUP, Dragan Lukač was born in 1956 in Bosanski Šamac. He graduated from the Faculty of Philosophy in Sarajevo in 1979 and obtained the title of professor of philosophy and sociology. He has been in police service continuously since 1982. According to these statements, Dragan Lukač is 62 years old and has 35 years of active service.

If we calculate that police officers have a beneficial service period of 4 months per year, i.e., that 12 months count as 16, then simple mathematics concludes that a police officer already after 30 years of active service has 40 years of pensionable service.

Therefore, Lukač should have been retired 5 years ago. Lukač has 46 and a half years of service if these 5 years with the benefit are included. We remind you that in 2010, Lukač requested the erasure of part of his service years to avoid retirement. The investigative bodies, as well as the Prosecutor's Office of the Sarajevo Canton, have received dozens of reports against Lukač, but to date there has been no reaction.

We publish documents showing the erasure of service years