In the frames of the trial over the Additive case on Thursday, in the opening statement process, the defense of the defendants stated that the decisions to procure additive for the needs of the Bitola and Oslomej plants hadn’t been made by the former heads independently, but rather through signatures of the Supervisory and Managing Boards.
Also, the attorneys said they hadn’t been members of a criminal association and that the tender processes had been carried out legally.
Andrijana Dimitrova, attorney for ex-ESM Director Vasko Kovacevski, stated that her client couldn’t be held to account for unscrupulous operation because decisions on public procurement were made collectively.
Vasko Stefanov, who succeeded Kovacevski at the head of ESM, presented a similar stand, stating that he had to sign the unanimous decisions because he would have been held criminally accountable had he not done so.
The defense of former ESM commercial director Ardijan Muca pointed out that his position didn’t cover public procurement processes. 32 physical persons and five legal entities are covered in the process.