Chair of the government Conflict of Interest Committee Natasa Novakovic commented on the deposition which former Economy Minister Martina Dalic gave to Croatian anti-corruption police Uskok, in which she talked about the government’s handling of Agrokor crisis.

N1 released exclusive transcripts of Dalic’s deposition on Wednesday evening. The transcripts also include depositions given to investigators by the Agrokor then crisis manager Ante Ramljak, and one of Dalic’s advisors Zoran Besak.

How surprised were you by the latest information which surfaced in public?

“The Committee is following all the information since this morning. Some things are new to us, while others the Committee was aware of. We are reading and analysing all the information.”

Considering the new facts that surfaced, will the Committee open new cases against some officials?

“The Committee will certainly hold a working meeting next week. The cases linked to the “Hotmail Affair” of Martina Dalic and (Prime Minister) Andrej Plenkovic are, as you know, already open. Considering the information that surfaced today the Committee will look into opening a case against (Finance Minister) Zdravko Maric, perhaps some other people as well, but I think it’s still to early to tell who they are. We need to analyse everything first.”

Will there be any further steps in the case of Andrej Plenkovic?

“Only a case is open at the moment. We requested the government to respond to us in June, but we have received nothing as of yet. Considering the information which was published today, and all we got from Martina Dalic, perhaps we will take the case to the session without the government’s response.”

How different is Martina Dalic’s deposition to the Committee from the one she gave Uskok?

“Some information is known to the Committee. I cannot say now what the exact discrepancy is.”

Could this have been discussed in the previous case against Zdravko Maric?

“The case was opened because of two meetings. We have questioned Maric and (leader of then coalition party Most) Petrov in the context of those two meetings because we knew when they were held. The previous Committee had opened that case, and they have not gone any further than that.”

Did you ask too few questions in the case of Zdravko Maric?

“I don’t think we did. We were limited at that moment, we were dealing with what was in the case. The only thing was the role Maric played in that meeting.”

Now after the transcript was published, would you say you’ve made the wrong decision?

“No. At that moment, with the facts we had, we made a good decision.”

When talking about the actions of some public officials – deceiving the public, the Committee – was a crime committed?

“The Committee will make that decision. Whether the actions were trustworthy, whether they hurt the politicians’ reputation, the public will be the judge of that.”

Do you feel any personal responsibility?

“No.”

Do you think you should have taken more time to look into the case of Zdravko Maric?

“The case was open for two years, I think that’s enough time. Also, the case was opened by the previous committee, and we made the decision based on the facts we had then. If we are looking at these new facts, there are tools to reopen the case.”

Follow N1 via mobile apps for Android | iPhone/iPad | Windows| and social media on Twitter | Facebook.