Criminal complaints filed against Stevcho Jakimovski and two Karposh municipal officials

Criminal complaints have been filed against former Karposh mayor Stevcho Jakimovski and two municipal employees identified by initials B. B. and S. S. Gj. over the issuance of building permits based on a Detailed Urban Plan (DUP) that had been annulled by the Constitutional Court in 2018.

Police say permits issued despite court decision and internal instructions

According to the Ministry of Interior, B. B., as head of the Urbanism Sector at Karposh Municipality, together with S. S. Gj., an employee in the same sector, issued a building permit on 23 July 2025 even though they knew the DUP for the site had been annulled by the Constitutional Court in 2018. The ministry says the permit was granted despite instructions from the then-mayor of Karposh not to issue extracts from plans or building permits for locations covered by annulled DUPs.

"After the third accused signed contracts with the investors to regulate the fee for arranging building land without checking that those contracts referred to applications filed for a location for which the DUP had been annulled and for which he himself had given instructions not to issue building permits, the first and second accused on 23.07.2025 issued a Building Permit to the investors, thereby enabling the investors to unlawfully acquire the right to construct a building worth 10 427 518 denars," the police complaint states.

The complaint further alleges that the municipal employees abused their positions when, on 29 October 2025, they again enabled investors to unlawfully acquire the right to build an object valued at 13 021 914 denars, despite knowing that the submitted basic project had been prepared contrary to the valid urban plan.

Investigators also point to two separate cases in which B. B., as sector head, issued decisions approving canopies even though legal and urbanist conditions were not met. On 25 March 2025 she issued a decision for a canopy that did not serve an existing building and was not in accordance with the valid urban plan, but was a separate structure placed in an area zoned D1 – park and landscape greenery, i.e. public space and a boulevard profile. In that instance the investor had not submitted complete documentation and no fee for arranging the building land had been calculated or paid.

The second canopy decision dates to 30 July 2025. Although an administrative procedure had previously been initiated for the same canopy and a 2024 decision ordered its removal, and despite incomplete documentation and unpaid fees, the first accused again issued a decision approving its construction.

Prosecutors have received the criminal complaints and further investigative steps are expected.

Photo: Arhiva