The Zagreb County Court on Saturday set a 30-day investigative detention for Dinko Mikulic, an assistant minister for housing issues of war veterans, who was arrested on Friday evening on suspicion that he received bribery from a private company in order to award it a contract to allocate flats to Homeland Defence War veterans in the area of Varazdin.
The court cited a possibility of witness tampering as the reason to remand the suspect in custody for a month,
Mikulic, who has been tasked with solving the housing problems of war veterans and their families for 12 years, is charged by the Office for Suppression of Corruption and Organised Crime (USKOK) with requesting 250,000 euros in bribes from the Varazdin-based company "Stanoing" in exchange for picking that firm to be a seller of flats, designated for war veterans, The anti-corruption investigative agency also alleges that in 2005 and 2006, Mikulic was given EUR 50,000 from the company, and that since then until his arrest he insisted on being paid the rest of the agreed kickbacks from Stanoing. This private company came into media limelight this past February when its owner and former director Eduard Brumen, his son Hrvoje, and a former executive, Ivanka Strmecki, as well as three more persons were apprehended on suspicion of white-collar wrongdoings and embezzlement of tens of millions of kuna from cash reserves, set aside for costs of maintenance and repairs of 483 housing buildings which were managed by this company.
As soon as the breaking news about Mikulic having reportedly received graft appeared on Friday afternoon, War Veterans' Affairs Minister Predrag Matic held a snap news conference to condemn the crime which the minister branded as the most perfidious form of crime when it was made to the detriment of war veterans.
The minister said that the investigation should establish exactly what had happened, and added that the government in general condemned any corruptive behaviour.
Such statements prompted Mikulic's lawyer Mate Matic to say on Saturday that it was unfair from the minister to declare a man guilty while the investigative procedure was still going on. The lawyer believes that the minister should stand by his assistant until he is proven guilty.