Vukajlović: Who cares about the truth about Sveti Stefan and why is the Government afraid of additional scrutiny?

Olivera Vukajlović:

He adds that such an approach lacks key answers, while the focus is redirected to secondary narratives and interpretations that do not contribute to understanding the essence of the problem, and that instead of an argumentative discussion based on facts and documents, the public is offered constructions that relativize issues of public interest.

"The attempt to present this topic as a political polemic is not accidental, as it is a way to avoid answering what is really important and to direct public attention in the wrong direction. That is why it is important to set things straight. At a time when a state is negotiating a settlement in an international arbitration proceeding, and the public does not have full insight into the details or a clear answer to the question of whether continuing the dispute could bring a more favorable outcome for the state or additional losses, seeking additional legal analysis is the only responsible and necessary action," she states.

He states that the question here is not who is right politically, but whether the state is perhaps giving up a better legal position without fully explaining it to the public. Therefore, he says, a simple question arises: who actually bothers to check things additionally?

"The published information about the arbitration proceedings confirms that the proposed settlement relates to the end of the dispute, the waiver of claims and counterclaims, the extension of the lease, the increase in the rent and the state's participation in the tenant's profits. This is precisely why the questions raised are even more important. When the state waives claims in a procedure that lasts for years and in which significant funds have been spent, citizens have the right to know on the basis of which legal and economic assessments such a decision was made," said Vukajlović.

According to her, the fact that competent institutions were involved in certain stages of the procedure does not close the issue of liability, but on the contrary, it further confirms the need to publicly announce whether there are formal opinions on the prospects of the dispute, the legal consequences of the settlement, and possible damage to state property.

"In a serious state, it is not enough to say that something is in the public interest. Public interest is proven by documents, analyses, contracts, risk assessments and clear accountability of those who make decisions. Therefore, the Government must publish the legal analysis, economic calculations and formal opinions on the basis of which it accepted this turn in the arbitration proceedings," she said in a statement.

Instead of, as he states, answers to these questions, the public is offered a series of unrelated topics, personal constructs, and political labels.

Such an approach, Vukajlović believes, does not contribute to the debate, but rather deliberately obscures it.

"The manipulative insertion of the Miločer story, with claims that do not correspond to the real circumstances of the period, is particularly indicative. When inaccurate or incomplete information is used as the basis for political conclusions, it is clear that the goal is not to inform, but to shape perceptions. The introduction of completely unrelated topics further confirms the same pattern: to bury the essence with side narratives in order to avoid discussing what is really important," she points out.

He adds that it is interesting how narratives change depending on the current context, which further confirms that this is not a principled approach, but a selective interpretation of the facts. In such a framework, the resistance to any additional verification becomes even more indicative and raises the question of why full transparency in the decision-making process is avoided.

"If there is any underlying interest, then the public has a right to know that information so that they can properly interpret the views expressed. The gist, however, remains the same:

– is the settlement the result of a legal analysis, and if so – whose?

– is the settlement the result of a financial assessment, and if so – based on what parameters?

– did the state have full insight into the possible outcomes of the arbitration before it decided to abandon further litigation?

He emphasizes that the public deserves clear and documented answers to these questions.

"Everything else, personal constructions, spin and substitution of theses represent an attempt to avoid these questions. President Jakov Milatović will continue to do what is his obligation: to seek answers, insist on legal certainty and protect the interests of the state. Because those who have arguments do not have a problem with questions. Only those who are not in favor of the answers and for whom the interests of investors are above the interests of the state have a problem with questions," she said.

He concludes that Sveti Stefan should be open, but the state must not turn a blind eye to decisions that may mean giving up its own rights without a clear explanation to the public.