This verdict shall become final on 14

BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA October 2010 COURT OF PRESIDING JUDGE S A R A J E VO JUDGE Criminal Division Goran Radević, signed Section II for Organized Crime, Economic Crimes and Corruption

Number: X‐K‐08/511‐1 , 14 October 2010

IN THE NAME OF BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA!

THE COURT OF BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA, the Criminal Trial Panel composed of Judge Goran Radević as the Presiding Judge, and Judges Anđelko Marijanović and Esad Fejzagić as the Panel members, with the participation of legal advisor‐assistant Mirela Gadžo as the record taker in the criminal case against the Accused EKREM SPAHIĆ and SELIM KOPIĆ, upon the Indictment of the Prosecutor's Office of BiH, number KT‐191/07 dated 4 January 2010, confirmed on 12 January 2010, for the grounded suspicion that they committed the criminal offense of Abuse of Office or Official Authority under Article 220(3) in conjunction with (1) of the Criminal Code of BiH CC of BiH), which case, pursuant to Article 26 of the Criminal Procedure Code of BiH (CPC of BiH), by the Decision of the Trial Panel rendered at the session held on 13 October 2010, was separated from the case against NIKOLA ŠEGO, MIRKO ŠEKARA, ENIS AJKUNIĆ, DARIO BUŠIĆ, RADOVAN DRAGAŠ, charged by the same Indictment of the Prosecutor's Office of BiH for the grounded suspicion that the same criminal offense was committed, following oral and public trial held in the presence of Dika Omerović, Prosecutor of the Prosecutor's Office of BiH, the Accused Ekrem Spahić and Selim Kopić, and their Defense Counsels Sedad Kadić and Mirsada Beganović‐Žutić, attorneys from Sarajevo, on 14 October 2010, rendered and publicly anounced the following:

V E R D I C T

THE ACCUSED:

Ekrem Spahić, son of Nurija, born on 5 July 1969 in Jablanica, residing in Tešanj, in the settlement of Dobropolje bb, Bosniak, citizen of Bosnia and Herzegovina, graduated engineer of transport, employed in the Ministry of Communications and Transport of Bosnia and Herzegovina as the Senior Specialist in the Sector for Transport, personal identification number: 0507969124138,

Selim Kopić, son of Sulejman, born on 15 November 2010 /translator's note: as rendered in the original/ in Milankovići, residing in Živinice, at 77 Donje Dubrave St., Bosniak, citizen of Bosnia and Herzegovina, graduated engineer of transport, employed in the Ministry of Communications and Transport of Bosnia and Herzegovina as the Chief Inspector in the Inspectorate of the Ministry, personal identification number: 1511952184235,

Pursuant to Article 283(1) b) of the Criminal Procedure Code of BiH, with respect to the aforementioned Accused, hereby

THE CHARGES ARE DISMISSED

That:

In the period from 25 October 2006 and 10 January 2007, as official and responsible persons in the institutions of Bosnia and Herzegovina, with a view to acquiring gain to another person, they took advantage of their office, exceeded the limits of their official authority, in a manner that in the capacity as official and responsible persons of the Ministry of Communications and Transport of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Article 1(3) and (4) of the Criminal Code of Bosnia and Herzegovina, in conjunction with Article 28(4) of the Law on International and Inter‐Entity Road Transport (Official Gazette of BiH, number 1/02), and Article 17(3) and (4) of the Rulebook on Criteria, Procedure and Method of Allocation of Foreign Permits for Cargo Transport to Local Carriers (Official Gazette of BiH, number 35/02) and the Decision of the minister of communication and transport number 01‐07‐8‐3712/06 dated 25 October 2006, in the capacity as members of the Commission for CEMT Permits Allocation of the Ministry of Communications and Transport of Bosnia and Herzegovina (hereinafter: the Commission), with the view to acquiring gain to the chosen legal entities ‐ the carriers in Bosnia and Herzegovina, made the Decision on allocation of the CEMT permits to 247 legal entities from the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and in a manner that, based on the prior mutual agreement, with the other Commission members, composed of Nikola Šego, in the capacity as the president and Mirko Šekara, Enis Ajkunić, Dario Bušić and Radovan Dragaš, in the capacity as members of the Commission for CEMT Permits Allocation they divided legal entities‐ the carriers , applying the “ethnic key”, to “”, “” and “ ”, and so:

Ekrem Spahić and Selim Kopić considered the requests and made decision on allocation of the CEMT permits to “Bosniak” carriers, including: VF Komerc Sarajevo, Nezemimum , Sandin , Zelex Kladanj, AE Hermes , Cemal Šped Sarajevo, AS Trans Gradačac, Rali Transport Gradačac, Medž export‐import , Haak Trans Vogošća, Ali Company , Herceg , Džambo Group Gračanica, Hano Sarajevo, Trink Odžak, TZS export‐import Goražde, Silentrans Tuzla, Krupa Transporti Bosanska Krupa, Mujkić Transport Brčko, Tuzla Transport Tuzla, Om sistem transport Company Srebrenik, Euro Trans Tešanj, Vembli biznis Srebrenik, Haze Sarajevo, Everman Ilidža, ABC Jukan Gračanica, Uniteks Srebrenik, Enis Trans , Neri Maglaj, Atal Sarajevo, Transpromet , Harun Srebrenik, Kehić Tuzla, HP Autoprevoz , Euro Commerc Tešanj, Ugarak produkt , Delvir

2 prom Tuzla, Lido Za transport Gračanica, Mujak Trans Gračanica, Palabras Živinice, Braća Ramić Gradačac, Trgoplasttrans Gračanica, Borac , Braća Bajrić Cazin, Activ Trans Tuzla, Omenko Trans Srebrenik, Tanjo Trans Goražde, GMP Josipović Srebrenik, Babilon Transporti Tuzla, Fam Zenica, Bosona Zenica, Sel‐Riz Company Kladanj, Sarvan Gradačac, Dedukić Union Tešanj, BTS Visoko, Sisko Trade Gračanica, Ado Trans Visoko, Nail , Almy Zenica, Tarevci‐Comerc Gradačac, NM‐Nuki Teočak, Benam–Internacional Gračanica, Drvotrans Srebrenik, Minika Comerc Tuzla, Sintrans Srebrenik, Badžo Gradačac, Bosnašped Tuzla, Herkos Tuzla, Sarajevska pivara Sarajevo, Gillete Gračanica, Voćepromet Tešanj, ‐expres Tešanj, Al‐Dino šped , Farex Tešanj, Max‐prom Gubaljević Gradačac, AD Spedition Bugojno, ATP Autoprevoz Maglaj, M‐H Odžak, HA‐Trans Odžak, Eurošped Herceg Maglaj, Inter Europa RTC Sarajevo, Man‐Šped , Škafa Sarajevo, Robot Commerce Sarajevo, Luzarka Gradačac, Frigošped Žepče, Asim komerc Gradačac, Muhić Trans Sarajevo, Transport Gračanica, Cestocom , Hemija pateting , Rebronja Istok and Dema Komerc Lukavac, thereafter, they merged three separately made lists of the legal entities‐carriers for allocation of the CEMT permits into one final list which they unanimously accepted and signed, without making an insight by the Commission members in one group into legality of work of the other Commission members, as well as without checking whether the requirements for allocation of the CEMT permits were met by the carriers, that is, the legal entities from the other two groups. Therefore, they provided for issuance of the CEMT permits to 247 legal entities in Bosnia and Herzegovina, although they knew or they could have known that such manner of allocation of the CEMT permits was opposite to Article 3 and 17 of the Rulebook on Criteria, Procedure and Method of Allocation of Foreign Permits for Cargo Transport to Local Carriers (Official Gazette of BiH, number 35/02) and Rules of Procedure of the Commission, as well as that 128 out of 247 legal entities which were allocated the CEMT permits did not meet the requirements referred to in Article 19 of the aforementioned Rulebook and requirements stated in the Notice for Submission of the Requests dated 18 October 2006 and that no single permit was allocated to 23 out of the total number of 446 legal entities although they were meeting all the necessary requirements for allocation of 31 CEMT permits. By doing so, they acquired the gain for the legal entities which did not meet legally stipulated requirements and which were allocated the CEMT permits, in a form of a gain that the legal entities had from annual income based on the allocated CEMT permits for the rendered transport services in Bosnia and Herzegovina‐ bilateral transport and rendered transport services abroad– transport among the CEMT member countries, in 2007. In such a manner, EKREM SPAHIĆ and SELIM KOPIĆ acquired the gain in the amount not less than KM 16,429,659.00 of income as stated in the bookkeeping records, KM 1,072,940.85 of the profit from bilateral transport as stated in the bookkeeping records, and gain from the transport services among the CEMT member countries, including the following legal entities:

1. Intereuropa d.o.o. – Sarajevo, Sarajevo, KM 285,630.00, that is, KM 13,217.60 of profit without having any runs among the CEMT member countries; 2. Zelex d.o.o. – Kladanj, KM 326,063.00 of income, that is, KM 3,147.57 of profit and having 47 runs among the CEMT member countries, 3. Mah Co. d.o.o. – Bihać, KM 117,256.00 of income, that is, KM 946.28 of profit without having any runs among the CEMT member countries;

3 4. Alfa d.o.o – Cazin, KM 389,891.00 of income, that is, KM 1,088.46 of profit and having 96 runs among the CEMT member countries, 5. Borac d.d. – Travnik, KM 0.00 of income, that is, 0.00 KM of profit and having 12 runs among the CEMT member countries, 6. Haaktrans d.o.o – Sarajevo, KM 427,669.00 of income, that is, 25,801.74 KM of profit without having any runs among the CEMT member countries; 7. BTS d.o.o. – Visoko, KM 148,212.00 of income, that is, KM 0.00 of profit without having any runs among the CEMT member countries; 8. Robot Commerce d.o.o. – Sarajevo, KM 61,826.00 of income, that is, KM 0.00 of profit without having any runs among the CEMT member countries; 9. Cemal Šped d.o.o – Sarajevo, KM 27,993.00 of income, that is, KM 4,586.92 of profit and without having any runs among the CEMT member countries; 10. Jedinstvo d.o.o – Vitez, KM 179,349.00 of income, that is, KM 1,325.89 of profit and having 18 runs among the CEMT member countries; 11. Muhić‐trans d.o.o – Sarajevo, KM 0.00 of income, that is, KM 0.00 profit and having 107 runs among the CEMT member countries, 12. Ugarak produkt d.o.o. – Visoko, KM 229,674.00 of income, that is, KM 13,307.94 of profit and having 3 runs among the CEMT member countries; 13. Eurotrans– Sarajevo, KM 984.735.00 of income, that is, KM 114,919.82 of profit and having 11 runs among the CEMT member countries; 14. NN Company – Zenica, KM 38,392.00 of income, that is, KM 5,365.03 of profit and having 41 runs among the CEMT member countries; 15. Pak‐rampart d.o.o – Visoko, KM 0.00 of income, that is, KM 0.00 of profit and having 14 runs among the CEMT member countries; 16. Džananović d.o.o – Zenica, KM 0.00 of income, that is, KM 0.00 KM of profit and having 22 runs among the CEMT member countries; 17. Tuzla prevoz d.o.o – Tuzla, KM 1,689, 967.00 of income, that is, KM 0.00 of profit and having 60 runs among the CEMT member countries; 18. Kujro promet – Gradačac, KM 144,121.00 of income, that is, KM 23,811.00 of profit and having 14 runs among the CEMT member countries; 19. Transey d.o.o – Tešanj, KM 997,388.00 of income, that is, KM 97,256.39 of profit and without having any runs among the CEMT member countries; 20. Konjuh d.d. – Živinice, KM 107,257.00 of income, that is, KM 287.21 of profit, and without having any runs among the CEMT member countries; 21. Europack d.o.o – Tuzla, KM 74,037.00 of income, that is, KM 409.44 of profit and having 21 runs among the CEMT member countries; 22. Delvir‐prom– , KM 471,725.00 of income, that is, KM 9,557.10 of profit and having 34 runs among the CEMT member countries, 23. Sezix‐kompani d.o.o – Živinice, KM 1,206.744.00 of income, that is, KM 106,990.36 of profit and having 167 runs among the CEMT member countries; 24. Euro‐commerce d.o.o – Tešanj, KM 664,067.00 of income, that is, KM 24,831.62 of profit and having 2 runs among the CEMT member countries; 25. Medž export‐import– Tuzla, KM 214,074.00 of income, that is, KM 9,861.29 of profit and having 11 runs among the CEMT member countries; 26. Asim‐komerc d.o.o. – Gradačac, KM 2,065,058.00 of income, that is, KM 548,428.59 of profit and without having any runs among the CEMT member countries;

4 27. Nutria – Živinice, KM 249,320.00 of income, that is, KM 18,254.50 of profit and having 87 runs among the CEMT member countries; 28. Drvotrans– Srebrenik, KM 818,164.00 of income, that is, KM 18,309.05 of profit and having 34 runs among the CEMT member countries, 29. Transport d.o.o – Gračanica, KM 184,642.00 of income, that is, KM 1,260.58 of profit and having 16 runs among the CEMT member countries, 30. Persel d.o.o – Srebrenik KM 2,020,379.00 of income, that is, KM 8,319.98 of profit and having 161 runs among the CEMT member countries, 31. Mani d.o.o – Srebrenik, KM 800,747.00 of income, that is, KM 4,684.90 of profit and having 447 runs among the CEMT member countries, 32. Dedukić‐union d.o.o – Tešanj, KM 1,405,280.00 of income, that is, KM 16,971.60 of profit and without having any runs among the CEMT member countries; 33. Autoprevoz d.d. – Maglaj, KM 0.00 of income, that is, KM 0.00 of profit and having 52 runs among the CEMT member countries, therefore they caused the damage to the legal entities Bitumenka D.D. Sarajevo, Coca‐Cola Hbc Hadžići, Dedajić D.O.O Sarajevo, Dijamant Transport Mostar, Euro‐Golax Gradačac, Europrospekt Prnjavor, Feks Trans Doboj Istok, Grga‐Trans Sarajevo, Hik Commerce Ljubuški, Kibglas Srebrenik, Koki‐Trans D.O.O. Laktaši, LKW Barbarić Žepče, Mat Transporti , Miljković D.O.O B.Luka, Minol Živinice, Nasko D.O.O Gračanica, Nevrestrans Banovići, Ora‐ Merc Gračanica, Res‐Trans Srebrenik, Sur Services Visoko, Tranzit D.O.O , Bob D.O.O Cazin, Su‐Han D.O.O Srebrenik, which were not allocated the CEMT permits although they met the legal requirements for allocation. The above persons , deprived these entities of the right to get the CEMT permits, that is, the right to generate income based on the allocated CEMT permits by rendering the transport services in Bosnia and Herzegovina and abroad in 2007,

WHEREBY, the Accused EKREM SPAHIĆ AND SELIM KOPIĆ would have committed the criminal offense of Abuse of Office or Official Authority under Article 220(3) in conjunction with (1) of the Criminal Code of Bosnia and Herzegovina

Pursuant to Article 189(1) of the CPC of BiH the costs of the criminal proceedings shall be paid from the budget appropriations of this Court.

R e a s o n i n g

The Prosecutor’s Office of Bosnia and Herzegovina submitted to this Court the Indictment against NIKOLA ŠEGO, MIRKO ŠEKARA, ENIS AJKUNIĆ, DARIO BUŠIĆ, RADOVAN DRAGAŠ, EKREM SPAHIĆ and SELIM KOPIĆ number KT‐191/07 dated 4 January 2010, confirmed on 12 January 2010, for the grounded suspicion that, as the members of the Commission for the 2007 CEMT Permits Allocation, they committed the criminal offense of Abuse of Office or Official Authority under Article 220(3) in conjunction with (1) of the Criminal Code of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Following the guilty plea hearing held before the Preliminary Hearing Judge of this Court when all the accused pleaded not guilty on all the Counts of the Indictment, the case was forwarded to the Trial Panel.

5 During the trial before this Panel, at the hearing held on 13 October 2010, in the stage of presentation of the prosecution evidence, the Prosecutor moved for the proceedings against the 6th Accused EKREM SPAHIĆ and 7th Accused SELIM KOPIĆ to be separated, conducted separately and completed by verdict dismissing the charges, stating that the Prosecutor’s Office would drop the charges against the 6th Accused EKREM SPAHIĆ and 7th Accused SELIM KOPIĆ. When the Panel heard all the parties and defense counsels, who mostly opposed the separation of the proceedings, except for the Prosecutor as well as the 6th Accused EKREM SPAHIĆ and 7th Accused SELIM KOPIĆ and their defenses who agreed with separation, the Panel rendered pursuant to Article 26 of the CPC of BiH the Decision number X‐K‐08/511‐1 dated 13 October 2010, to separate, conduct separately and complete before this Panel the case against the 6th Accused EKREM SPAHIĆ and 7th Accused SELIM KOPIĆ, for judicial economy and purposefulness of the proceedings, and to resume the proceedings against NIKOLA ŠEGO, MIRKO ŠEKARA, ENIS AJKUNIĆ, DARIO BUŠIĆ, RADOVAN DRAGAŠ before this Panel.

At the main trial against the 6th Accused EKREM SPAHIĆ and 7th Accused SELIM KOPIĆ, held on 14 October before this Panel, the Prosecutor abandoned prosecution, that is, dropped the charges against the 6th Accused EKREM SPAHIĆ and 7th Accused SELIM KOPIĆ, from the Indictment of the Prosecutor’s Office of BiH, number KT‐191/07 dated 4 January 2010, confirmed on 12 January 2010, filed for the grounded suspicion that they have committed the criminal offense of Abuse of Office or Official Authority under Article 220(3) in conjunction with (1) of the Criminal Code of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

At the trial, when explaining his motion orally, the Prosecutor noted the Prosecutor’s Office concluded that the reasons for abandonment of prosecution in respect of the 6th Accused EKREM SPAHIĆ and 7th Accused SELIM KOPIĆ are justified having taken the statements for the record which the Accused SELIM KOPIĆ and EKREM SPAHIĆ gave on 2 September and 27 September 2010 in the capacity as the witnesses in the case of the Prosecutor’s Office number KTA‐307/10, in which the Accused explained in details the reasons for occurrence of the illegalities in work of he Commission including the reasons as to why the aforementioned persons did not consider themselves responsible for those illegalities, and having considered the arguments given in the statements and viewed them in the light of other physical evidence and statements of witnesses. Considering the foregoing, the Prosecutor’s Office stated that it believed that there was no intent, as the basic subjective element to establish the existence of a criminal offense on the part of the Accused SELIM KOPIĆ and EKREM SPAHIĆ because all the actions that they took part in and with which they were charged under the Indictment had already been agreed among other members of the Commission, therefore, they could not influence them in any way. Besides, as the reason for withdrawal of the Indictment, the Prosecutor’s Office also indicated the fact that the Accused SELIM KOPIĆ and EKREM SPAHIĆ did not participate voluntarily in the work of the Commission but that it resulted from the threat and coercion of the President of the Commission.

Considering such state of the facts at the trial when the Prosecutor’s Office orally explained its motion, it stated that a lack of intent, automatically, excludes their criminal responsibility, therefore, it abandoned the prosecution of the said persons. Subsequently, the Prosecutor’s Office also filed to the case file a copy of the official note of the

6 Prosecutor’s Office including the said conclusions on dropping of the charges which was forwarded to the parties to the proceedings.

The provision of Article 38 of the CPC of BiH stipulates (Principle of Mutability) that “The Prosecutor may abandon prosecution before the end of a main trial or during the proceedings before the Panel of the Appellate Division when provided by this Code. “ The provision of Article 283 (1) b) of the CPC of BiH stipulates (Verdict Dismissing the Charges) that the Court shall pronounce a verdict dismissing the charges…” if the Prosecutor dropped the charges between the beginning and the end of the main trial”. Pursuant to the accusatory principle the criminal proceedings may only be conducted if there is a request of the Prosecutor regardless of the stage of the criminal proceedings.

So, starting from the cited provision of Article 38 of the CPC of B‐H regulating that the Prosecutor may abandon prosecution before the end of a main trial and during the proceedings before the trial panel, as well as the cited provision of Article 283 (1) b) of the CPC of BiH, considering the fact that the Prosecutor in charge of the case, at the said trial abandoned the prosecution, that is, dropped the charges against the Accused EKREM SPAHIĆ and SELIM KOPIĆ, the Court, due to the foregoing reasons and guided by the provisions of Article 283(1) b) of the CPC of BiH and Article 189(1) of the CPC of BiH, rendered decisions as stated in the operative part of this Verdict exclusively in reference to the Accused EKREM SPAHIĆ and SELIM KOPIĆ.

Given the fact that the Prosecutor’s Office, following dropping of the charges, failed to adapt, that is, amend the said Indictment in reference to the Accused EKREM SPAHIĆ and SELIM KOPIĆ, when rendering the Verdict to dismiss the charges against the 6th Accused EKREM SPAHIĆ and 7th Accused SELIM KOPIĆ, upon the Indictment of the Prosecutor's Office of BiH, number KT‐191/07 dated 4 January 2010, confirmed on 12 January 2010, for the grounded suspicion that they committed the criminal offense of Abuse of Office or Official Authority under Article 220(3) in conjunction with (1) of the Criminal Code of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Panel decided ex officio, without fear of violation of the principle of subjective and objective identity of the Indictment and Verdict , to leave out from the factual description of the said Indictment including this Verdict as well, all the criminal actions and facts referring to the other Accused NIKOLA ŠEGO, MIRKO ŠEKARA, ENIS AJKUNIĆ, DARIO BUŠIĆ and RADOVAN DRAGAŠ.

Following rendering and public announcement of this Verdict at the hearing held on 14 October 2010, dismissing the charges against Accused EKREM SPAHIĆ and SELIM KOPIĆ pursuant to 283(1) b) of the CPC of BiH and legal instructions of this Panel, the Prosecutor of the Prosecutor’s Office of BiH DIKA OMEROVIĆ, the Accused EKREM SPAHIĆ and SELIM KOPIĆ and their Defense Counsels SEDAD KADIĆ AND MIRSADA BEGANOVIĆ‐ŽUTIĆ, attorneys from Sarajevo, consistently stated that they waived the right to appeal from this Verdict; therefore, the Verdict has become legally binding on the day of its rendering and announcement, that is, as of 14 October 2010.

7 LEGAL REMEDY:

An appeal from this Verdict shall not be allowed.

RECORD TAKER PRESIDING JUDGE Legal Advisor – Assistant JUDGE Mirela Gadžo Goran Radević

I hereby confirm that this document is a true translation of the original written in Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian. Sarajevo, 29 November 2010 Emilija Lazić, Certified Court Interpreter for English Language

8