The "Pulse" Trial: Prosecution's Expert Calls the Defence's Expert Report "Professional Self-Disqualification"

At the trial over the fire at the "Pulse" nightclub in Kočani, two expert reports clashed that seem to describe two different buildings. Professor Goran Markovski of the Faculty of Civil Engineering at Ss. Cyril and Methodius University, an expert hired by the Public Prosecutor's Office, called the report put forward by the defence of first defendant Dejan Jovanov "professional self-disqualification" and "engineering alchemy".

"There are no professional disagreements here, only serious deficiencies," Markovski said of Petre Ruseski's findings. In his view, the analysis took into account only circumstances that favour the defendant, and skipped the construction and legal questions at the core of the case.

Markovski listed the points that, he says, are missing from the defence's report: the polyurethane foam on the ceiling, the decorative sheet metal used to close off the windows, the ventilation, and the steel galleries, beams and columns built into the venue. This, he said, was not "interior decoration" but a reconstruction that affected the structural system and required a design, documentation and approval.

"Could we turn this courtroom into a nightclub without approval from the competent authority, without a design and without going through the procedure? Of course not!" the expert said.

One signature for three professions

The sharpest detail is a formal one, but it weighs heavily. Ruseski's report was requested in three fields - construction, architecture and fire protection - yet it was signed only by him, a civil engineer who told the court himself that he has no expertise in architecture or fire protection. Markovski also pointed out that the venue's minimum technical conditions were established on the basis of a market inspector's report from 2012. If that is the last inspection the defence is relying on, the question of who actually checked "Pulse", and when, remains open.

The prosecution also objected to the way the defence is presenting its evidence. Prosecutors opposed the defence deciding on its own when to submit the report by Miroslav Grčev, hired by one of the defendants, and warned against dragging out the proceedings. The prosecution also noted that some of the experts hired by the defendants are themselves charged, together with Ramiz Merko, in a case over illegal construction in Struga, for giving false findings and opinions.

16 defence witnesses to come

Jovanov's defence has proposed 16 witnesses, among them his daughter, employees of Kočani Municipality, the Interior Ministry and the fire service, as well as people involved in fitting out the nightclub. It is their testimony that should show who issued permits and who was supposed to supervise a venue in which around 60 young people died.

The victims' parents believe the defence's expert report is an attempt to water down responsibility. Besides the owner, 33 more people are charged in the case. The court has yet to decide whose findings it believes - and on that depends whether this tragedy remains a story about an "accident", or about a system that, according to the prosecution's expert, let a venue remodelled without a design or approval operate as a nightclub.