Does SDSM use police interception of communications for political purposes?

0
36

VMRO-DPMNE Vice President Aleksandar Nikoloski, at yesterday's TV duel with
Radmila Sekerinska publicly accused of physical and electronic surveillance of the
highest opposition officials by the security services of the country.
He supported this rather shocking information with several examples of recording
and filming of party leader Hristijan Mickoski, as well as intercepted phone
coordination, after which SDSM leader Zoran Zaev had an advantage in creating
leadership positions in relation to the opposition.
Nikoloski's claim is not the first in a series of inconsistencies that the security system
reform system has left behind. First of all, the ANB, or the old UBK, still has the
technical capabilities to monitor communications without the mediation of the OTA,
and without any special control by the BPPO. It is this space, left under scrutiny for
the protection of "state interests", that enables the ANB to be able to directly monitor
political opponents of the government through the Supreme Court through a broad
and vague wording of protection of the constitutional order and terrorism.
How this is possible, one would ask. Many have forgotten the case of official notes
with false content of members of the UBK submitted to the Public Prosecutor's
Office, which two years ago demanded the detention of former VMRO-DPMNE
officials for allegedly owning property abroad.

This construction, in conjunction with the Prosecutor's Office, is in fact the darkest
side of DBK/UBK/ANB for more than 70 years since it was formed as part of the
Yugoslav OZNA.

Доколку преземете содржина од оваа страница, во целост сте се согласиле со нејзините Услови за користење.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here