In its latest issue, the weekly newspaper Nacional published the testimony of a witness, allegedly a former employee of the Minister of Culture, Nina Obuljen-Korzinek, who claims to have documents on the questionable use of funds for reconstruction after the earthquake. According to the weekly newspaper, it is a direct exchange of letters with the Minister of Culture in which the interlocutor warned against the misuse of European funds.

The witness claims, among other things, that the tenders for the renovation were only announced after the work had already been agreed. Therefore, N1 Zagreb asked the minister whether the tenders for the renovation were announced after the works had been agreed and whether, as Nacional reports, the minister ever received a written warning about it?

The Ministry claims that all reconstruction projects were carried out in accordance with legal regulations, and those financed from the Solidarity Fund passed the controls of the competent authorities.

There were no irregularities, says the Ministry

They also point out that it is not the Ministry but the heads of the organisations implementing the projects who are responsible for the implementation of the individual projects financed by the Solidarity Fund.

Nacional and the news sites Telegram and 24sata published information according to which the restoration works was carried out by the Croatian Conservation Institute.

In its response to N1, the Ministry claims that the Institute had the prescribed task of managing the reconstruction and denies any irregularities.

They repeat that due to the damage to cultural heritage buildings, the Ministry organised the implementation of emergency measures, which included inventory and assessment of damage, evacuation of movable inventory, support or dismantling of unstable parts of buildings and the like.

Complex restoration process

“The process of preparing and carrying out the renovation was particularly complex, difficult and demanding due to the circumstances of the Covid-19 pandemic, additional earthquakes and progressive damage, as well as subsequent cost increases due to inflation and difficulties in finding contractors.

In the period immediately after the earthquake and before the funds from the Solidarity Fund were secured and before the individual institutions prepared the documentation and tendered the reconstruction projects, the Ministry of Culture and Media carried out emergency measures for its institutions and the most valuable monuments from national funds earmarked for regular cultural heritage restoration projects in other parts of Croatia,” the ministry said.

“After the European Commission approved the funds, the Ministry of Culture and Media, which is responsible for implementing the financial contribution, authorised individual reconstruction projects of public buildings damaged by the earthquake and having the status of cultural goods through appeals financed by the EU Solidarity Fund.

All projects were carried out in accordance with the rules of the Solidarity Fund, which set out precisely how the funds are reported, used and monitored. All checks carried out so far by the relevant institutions, including regular audits by the SAFU, have not revealed any irregularities,” they emphasise.

How much money was spent?

After the earthquakes in Zagreb and Petrinja, the Ministry of Culture and Media, as the implementing agency, financed more than 300 individual projects through the Solidarity Fund, including cultural buildings, state buildings, public buildings in the City of Zagreb and neighbouring districts, all buildings belonging to Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts and religious buildings.

“At the end of the Solidarity Fund implementation period, more than 500 million euros have been realised through the Ministry of Culture and Media, and the continuation of reconstruction is financed through the National Recovery and Resilience Plan and from national funds,” the Ministry’s response states.

Referring to the media reports that the Croatian Conservation Institute ordered the works during the renovation. The Ministry of Culture and Media states that it did not carry out procurements for services and works, but that the users of the funds did so themselves.

Everything has been checked

“For activities financed with national or EU funds, the Ministry was responsible for verifying that purchases were made in accordance with the applicable regulations. Article 70 of the Reconstruction Act stipulates that the reconstruction of a public building must be based on the decision of the owner and/or donor, i.e., the legal entity or organisation to which the building was handed over for management.

When implementing the decision on the renovation of a public building, the owner is obliged to select the parties involved in the construction (designers, auditors, contractors, construction managers) based on a public tender in accordance with the Rulebook on the Implementation procurement procedures of goods, services and works for reconstruction procedures, the Public Procurement Act and the Reconstruction Act,” states the answer to N1’s question.

The Ministry also said that rules have been established at government level, i.e., at the National Coordination Body (NKT), to justify the cost of certain sources of funding. This applies to the Solidarity Fund and the National Recovery and Resilience Plan. It should be noted that these rules have been approved in all their segments by the competent bodies of the European Commission, which have confirmed their compliance with the EU framework.