Mira Tuka: They Killed My Son, and the Prosecutor's Office Says No One Is Guilty

(Patria) - Twenty-one-year-old Valentin Vujica from Kiseljak died on December 21, 2017, while working at the company Stamal d.o.o. in Kreševo.
Two years later, Valentin's mother Mira Tuka expresses her dissatisfaction and outrage at the work of the Prosecutor's Office of the Central Bosnia Canton, because a decision was ultimately made not to conduct an investigation. The mother of the deceased young man points out that her son was “roasted and sliced, and the Prosecutor's Office says no one is guilty.”

The lawyer of the Tuka family, Almin Dautbegović, has also submitted complaints regarding the notification of the non-conduct of an investigation to all addresses, and the family of the deceased Vujica hopes that the truth will be established. 
Mother Mira suspects that her son was killed, and that the Prosecutor's Office and the acting prosecutor Šemsudin Fuško failed to investigate every one of her suspicions.

„I asked the prosecutor for a copy of my son's autopsy findings, I asked for the photographs taken at the site of the accident in the company Stamal Kreševo. I am also requesting the expert report on the clothing as well as the blood analysis conducted at the Federal Police Administration in Sarajevo, and for him to explain why statements were not taken from the people who were present when my son was found dead in the machine,” says Tuka for Patria.

She expresses suspicion and publicly shares her knowledge that her son was without clothes in the machine, and wonders why one of her son's boots was never found and why the jacket in front of the machine was thrown on the floor.

Pushed into the machine

„I suspect he was forcibly taken and pushed into the machine, because if he took off his jacket himself, why would he throw it like that. The lath found near the machine was not taken as evidence, and with it my son was hit on the back and head. That is how he fell into the basket, which had no protective net or railing. For what reason did the prosecutor not check all my allegations and the police report that was dismissed? Who would voluntarily enter a running machine? I don't know who is hiding and why,” states Tuka, saying that her son had received threats, but that the Prosecutor's Office did not want to examine his mobile phone.

In his complaint, Dautbegović stated that the Prosecutor's Office justifies its decision only superficially, stating that the company BFS d.o.o. Sarajevo complied with regulations in the field of occupational safety at the place where the deceased performed the tasks during which he sustained injuries and subsequently died. 

„Why would a sophisticated and educated person enter a machine without equipment and tools. That machine, as we stated in our objections, had a dual purpose, but did not have a usage permit,” emphasizes Dautbegović.

Namely, according to the statement of the worker who maintained the machines, Kasim Čelinković, a locksmith who worked as a locksmith in the same company, the purpose of the machine in question was changed, i.e., it began to perform another function as needed, meaning its technological work process was altered. The machine was improvised according to the company's needs. Initially, it was only a machine for crushing and grinding stone, and later its purpose was changed so that it was also made into a machine for drying wood and piles.

The lawyer clearly states that the Prosecutor's Office listed exhaustively that the regulations were complied with, as is evident from the Record of the inspection supervision of the Ministry of Economy, and from the testimony of the witness inspector of the Ministry of Economy of the Central Bosnia Canton, Hasan Hrnjić.

Record of the process

„The Prosecutor's Office lightly passes over the fact that the Record of the performed inspection for work was issued in November 2015. They also overlooked the fact that the technological work process on that machine had been changed,” points out lawyer Dautbegović.

In this specific case, the Prosecutor's Office, therefore, did not at all determine what the deceased was actually doing on that machine. The Prosecutor's Office also did not at all determine whether the deceased was performing the tasks of his workplace at the time of the accident? What was he doing in the „basket” at the critical moment?

In other words, what was the job description for his workplace of „System Operator for Hydration” to which he was assigned? Should he have even entered the machine to fix that malfunction, and was that his job?

Namely, according to the Employment Contract under which the deceased performed his duties, he was assigned to the workplace of „System Operator for Hydration,” and the more important tasks of the workplace are particularly considered to be supervision and management of the production process. 

„It is justifiably asked why the victim would voluntarily enter a running machine that he knew was malfunctioning and that contained knives inside, when that is not part of the job description and tasks of his workplace,” emphasizes Dautbegović, adding that in this specific case, the essential facts and factual situation have not been fully established, and the stated reasons, nor the provided explanation, are adequate and sufficient.