High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council (HJPC) Hides Warnings on Kajganić's Decisions in Dodik Case from Public for Over a Month

(Patria) - Džermin Pašić, Deputy Chief State Prosecutor, warned the top judicial institution in Bosnia and Herzegovina in a letter in early October that his position is being degraded and that he is being bypassed during the investigation into attacks on the constitutional order, and that he is suffering mobbing from Chief Prosecutor Milanko Kajganić, who he stated has established a mechanism for controlling decision-making in the case where Milorad Dodik was the suspect, Detektor has learned. A month later, the leadership and members of the High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council (HJPC) continue to ignore inquiries instead of offering answers.

In early October this year, the Deputy Chief Prosecutor explained in writing to the HJPC the problems he is facing at his workplace due to the actions of Milanko Kajganić, the Chief State Prosecutor, chronologically, according to the content of the letter which Detektor had access to.

This letter is one of a series of pieces of evidence from the list in the criminal complaint that Pašić filed with the State Prosecutor's Office on Wednesday, November 12, against his boss and prosecutor Vedrana Mijović, accusing them of making decisions in favor of the then-suspected fugitives Milorad Dodik, Radovan Višković, and Nenad Stevandić.

Pašić confirmed to Detektor that he sent the complaint a month ago, but that the HJPC has not reacted.

“I have not received any calls, and I expected someone to call me given the very serious nature of the complaint,” Pašić said.

The President of the HJPC, Sanin Bogunić, did not wish to verbally comment on Pašić's findings for Detektor and requested a written inquiry, to which the HJPC has not yet responded. The Council held two public sessions after the letter, during which it was not mentioned.

In this letter dated October 7, Pašić reminded that proceedings are underway at the Prosecutor's Office against Milorad Dodik, Radovan Višković, and Nenad Stevandić due to the existence of grounds for suspicion that they committed the criminal offense of “attack on the constitutional order.” In the meantime, a decision to suspend the investigation was made in this case.

As Pašić states, he had the role of supervisor in this case, acted in certain procedural circumstances, and participated in certain evidentiary actions.

“At my suggestion, prosecutorial teams were formed with the acting prosecutor, all to make the procedure more efficient, free from any negative perception and questioning of independence and impartiality in work,” stated the Deputy Chief Prosecutor, explaining how the functioning of prosecutorial teams was transformed into a form of collective decision-making and outvoting in decision-making.

“There are numerous examples where prosecutorial decisions in important cases have not been made to this day precisely because of this imposed standard of collective decision-making, which today clearly represents an instrument of control solely within the capacity of the chief prosecutor,” the letter states.

Pašić, referring to the case against Dodik, Stevandić, and Višković, states that he is facing difficulties and obstructions in his work, and that this is evident due to the nature of the criminal offense, the high positions held by the suspects, and the great public interest.

With the formation of this case, as stated in the letter to which Detektor had access, the relationship between the chief prosecutor and Pašić was damaged due to differences in opinion. No collegium has been convened since June 2025, Pašić states in the letter, adding that he has not had direct official communication with Kajganić regarding the organization of work and the functioning of the Prosecutor's Office.

The Deputy Chief Prosecutor states that in the case against Dodik and others, which was an active case without a prosecutorial decision at the time of his letter, he proposed shortening the formed prosecutorial team from nine to four prosecutors, which was rejected.

“The decision would not be questionable if the chief prosecutor had not, shortly thereafter, using the argument of my proposal, decided to disband the team and entrust further work on the case to only one prosecutor, to whom it was originally assigned,” the letter states, adding that one of the reasons for forming the prosecutorial team was the public perception regarding the family circumstances of the prosecutor, whose father was a member of SNSD.

“As Deputy Chief Prosecutor and Head of Department, I issued an instruction to the acting prosecutor to inform me of all measures and actions she intended to take, i.e., I requested information about the plan of investigative activities,” stated Pašić, adding that the prosecutor ignored this instruction and that in July 2025, she took certain actions related to the surrender of the suspects. He states that he did not receive a report on the actions taken, and that it was submitted to the chief prosecutor.

Pašić received an invitation to testify as a witness in his capacity as Deputy Chief Prosecutor, which he considered a need for his recusal from supervision of work and review of decisions made.

He was questioned, as he states, on September 30, 2025, and was “deprived of the further possibility of exercising the rights and fulfilling the obligations of the Deputy Chief Prosecutor – Head of Department.”

Pašić states that he is daily faced with various forms of pressure at work, which have the nature of mobbing.

In his letter to the HJPC, he states that in September 2024, he was appointed as one of the heads of the Special Department for Organized Crime, Economic Crime, and Corruption, and at the same time as the Head of the Department for Organized Crime, but that by this decision, his realization of certain rights and obligations as Head of Department was limited to the Department for Organized Crime, Human Trafficking, and Terrorism.

“Therefore, since taking over the function entrusted to me, I have been facing constant limitations,” Pašić states in his letter to the HJPC and adds that the decision on his appointment is not in line with the rulebook on internal organization of the Special Department, nor with the internal regulations of the Prosecutor's Office.

He states that heads had already been appointed in the Department for Terrorism and the Department for Human Trafficking, and that after his appointment, he could not express his opinion on the solutions for management staff in these departments, even though he managed them.

The Deputy President of the HJPC, Sanela Gorušanović Butigan, also did not wish to comment on the findings from Pašić's complaint and referred journalists to President Bogunić. Council members Duška Bogojević, Saša Sarajlić, Davor Martinović, and Željka Fabić also did not wish to comment publicly on the case.

The Office of the Disciplinary Prosecutor did not immediately respond as to whether a case had been opened against Kajganić based on Pašić's letter.

Due to his actions in the case against Dodik, Stevandić, and Višković, Prosecutor Pašić filed a criminal complaint against Kajganić and the acting prosecutor Vedrana Mijović. Based on this complaint, the BiH Prosecutor's Office has opened a case. Disciplinary prosecutors have not yet announced whether they have also opened a disciplinary case.