Split Shipyard Lost 100 Million Kuna Per Ship

During the continuation of the trial in the Brodosplit affair at the County Court in Split, former director of the shipyard Domagoj Klarić testified today, stating that losses had been incurred at the shipyard for decades.

– Unfortunately, all ships built in the Split shipyard over the last decades were built at a loss – said Klarić, who was director from 2007 to 2009.

In the Brodosplit affair, the indictment of the County State Attorney’s Office charges eight defendants with abusing their positions and powers and money laundering, causing damage to the company amounting to 4.7 million dollars.

The affair was uncovered in 2006 when a warning about money laundering at Brodosplit arrived from Austria. The then management of Brodosplit agreed with the German company Wessels, represented by the first defendant Drago Maček, to build four tankers for the price of 51.5 million dollars, but the then director of Brodosplit, the second defendant Goran Vukasović, signed additional so-called side letters that returned 1.9 percent of the contracted price to the client as a commission.

The first defendant Maček is charged with inciting the crime of abuse of position, while the second defendant Goran Vukasović, former director of Brodosplit, and the third defendant Ante Luetić, a commercialist at Brodosplit, are charged with abuse of position and authority. In addition to these three, Mateo Tramontana, Ivica Donkov, Hrvoje Matovinović, Danijel Nikolić, and Ivan Cesarac are also charged with money laundering.

Domagoj Klarić stated in today’s testimony that in 2006, at the time the affair was uncovered, he was a member of the management board of Brodosplit, but he was not aware of the ‘side letters’, learning about them only from the media.

According to a recent letter that arrived at the court from the Split shipyard, which was discussed in today’s questioning, a loss of allegedly 300 million kuna was incurred on four ships built for the German Wessels. However, these losses are smaller than those from previously built ships in the Split shipyard, which averaged 100 million per ship, Klarić added.

When asked by Ante Nobil, the defense attorney for the first defendant Drago Maček, whether anyone at the meetings of the Supervisory Board of Brodosplit disputed the construction price of the ships contracted with the client – the company Wessels, Klarić replied that he does not remember anyone disputing that price.

In response to a question from the prosecution representative, Deputy County State Attorney Marina Matušan, whether as a director he informed the Supervisory Board of Brodosplit about the company’s operations, which, according to her, he was obliged to do, Klarić replied that he did not do so, but consulted with the company’s professional service regarding this matter.

– I was relieved of my duties as president of the management board of Brodosplit at the beginning of 2009 because, in the opinion of the Supervisory Board, I did not provide certain reports on operations from the previous period – said Klarić.

He explained that at the time when the possibility of concluding a contract with Wessels opened, before he became the director of Brodosplit, the client sent inquiries and messages expressing interest in having ships built for him, and Klarić, as he said, allows for the possibility that the shipowner had some pre-contracts.

In response to hours of questioning, Klarić also stated that there had previously been a proposal for the restructuring of Brodosplit, but the government ‘rejected it for social reasons’ because it feared that a larger number of workers at the Split shipyard could lose their jobs. The trial continues tomorrow with the questioning of new witnesses.

At the first questioning hearing in the court proceedings in the Brodosplit affair, held on December 6, 2012, it was stated that the questioning of about 50 witnesses was planned and that this court process could last for months.