Newly Unlocked Phone Becomes Key Evidence in Croatian Corruption Trial

A Croatian court hearing for four former ministers and a mayor has taken an unexpected turn with prosecutors revealing a significant new piece of evidence: the mobile phone of Ružica Njavro, a former secretary in the Ministry of Agriculture. Njavro, who is a witness in the current proceedings but accused in a separate case linked to former presidential advisor Josipa Pleslić (formerly Rimac), had her phone seized in 2020.

Until now, the phone remained locked. However, the State Prosecutor's Office for the Suppression of Corruption and Organized Crime (USKOK) has apparently found a way to access its contents. USKOK requested the court to order a search of the phone, believing it contains vital communications, including exchanges between Njavro and Ana Mandac, a former key aide to ex-minister Darko Horvat. Mandac has already pleaded guilty and reached a deal with USKOK in this case.

“

USKOK believes that Ružica Njavro's mobile phone contains her communication with Ana Mandac, which are considered important evidence for this procedure.

The prosecution alleges that the phone's contents could prove communication between Njavro and Tomislav Tolušić, another former minister on trial. Tolušić is accused of intervening with Horvat to ensure state subsidies were awarded to specific companies, Cestogradnja d.o.o. Slatina and Megamont, despite them allegedly not meeting the required criteria. These companies reportedly received 400,000 kuna in subsidies due to alleged ties with Tolušić.

Evidence of communication between Mandac and Njavro was previously established through Mandac's phone, which, like Rimac's, yielded millions of transcribed conversations. Their communication on December 12, 2018, included plans to meet, and Mandac later sent Njavro a message listing the companies Cestogradnja and Megamont. Njavro, when previously questioned as a witness, claimed to have no recollection of the tender details or the companies mentioned in her communications. The defense has objected to the new evidence, citing concerns about potential contamination of data from the phone seized in 2020.

“

We cannot know what happened to the mobile phone that was confiscated in 2020.