Zdravko Mamić safest in BiH, arrest threatens him in 192 countries

ZAGREB, (Patria) - When he becomes a "wanted person", which is only a matter of days, Zdravko Mamić will not be allowed to set foot in as many as 192 countries, Croatian media report.

That is the number of Interpol member states, so if he crosses their borders, he will be arrested. However, there are six destinations where he could seek refuge and be one hundred percent safe, and those are North Korea, Micronesia, and four smaller island nations: Kiribati, Palau, Tuvalu, and Vanuatu.

A domestic warrant will be issued for him first, followed by an international one, which is valid in countries outside the European Union. If Mamić flies to Brussels, they will not be able to handcuff him there without a European arrest warrant, writes Večernji list.

He is currently safest, by all accounts, in BiH, whose citizenship he recently obtained and where he arrived the day before the verdict.

An extradition treaty between Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina was signed at the end of 2012 in Zagreb. According to it, BiH can extradite its citizens prosecuted or finally convicted by the Croatian judiciary only for - organized crime, corruption, and money laundering. The list of organized crime includes criminal offenses punishable by imprisonment for four years or more, and "committed by an organized criminal group." Organizing and belonging to an organized criminal group are also under the same "umbrella.".

Corruption, according to the same agreement, includes abuse of office, then active and passive illegal intermediation using influence, as well as bribery of an official, but also bribery in the private sector and embezzlement.

Zdravko Mamić does not fit into these frameworks; he was convicted of abuse of trust in business operations. Also, perpetrators of criminal offenses punishable by imprisonment for ten years or more can be extradited. And here Mamić could "slip through" because he faced up to 10 years behind bars. There is another mitigating circumstance for Mamić. The treaty was signed on November 28, 2012, and Article 34 states that it applies only to offenses committed after that date.

The malversations regarding the payment of transfer compensation in the case of Luka Modrić occurred, according to the indictment, from July 2008 to August 2012, and in the case of Dejan Lovren from January to March 2011. Therefore, before the signing.

And while all eyes are on the BiH judiciary, the judges who ruled on brothers Zdravko and Zoran Mamić, Damir Vrbanović, and Milan Pernar have breathed a sigh of relief. Their most famous defendant called them monsters on Wednesday and promised to ensure they wouldn't sleep soundly, but they did not perceive it as a threat. Therefore, they are not under protection.

- I do not feel threatened; I am on a short annual leave. I did not take those statements as threats; I walk freely around the city; I have gone through more serious proceedings - says judge Miroslav Rožac.

His colleagues Darko Krušlin and Miroslav Jukić are also not afraid.

On Thursday, Zdravko Mamić submitted a request for an ID card at the local police station in Tomislavgrad. And on Friday, the "Dinamo We Are Dinamo Association" submitted a request to GNK Dinamo to annul the decision stating that Dinamo suffered no damage from Mamić's malversations.

- If the court requests it, we will initiate extradition proceedings - they said from the Association.

An extradition request is submitted at the request of a judicial authority, and the Ministry of Justice has not yet received such a request in the case of Zdravko Mamić.

- If the competent authority requests our action, we will act accordingly, in accordance with our jurisdiction. Therefore, if such proceedings occur, the Ministry of Justice expects the extradition procedure prescribed by law and international treaties to be carried out - they said from the Ministry.

The extradition procedure itself is carried out to determine whether the conditions for extradition are met, they explain, and after that, a decision is made on the admissibility of extradition. The judicial authority determines whether the conditions for extradition are met.