The opposition today alleged three contracts worth 1.5 million euros, signed by the Ministry of Digital Transformation with the company Noma System Solutions. The accusation was made by Jon Frchkoski, a member of the SDSM executive board, who is calling for the resignation of Minister Stefan Andonovski.

According to the claim, the contracts cover maintenance of a document management system, software for a property register and software for examinations.

The connection the opposition describes

The claim runs like this: the company's manager is Vladimir Simovski, who was a direct business partner and co-owner with Martin Klincharov, the husband of State Secretary Klincharova, in the firm SVAG FOOD DOO Skopje. On top of that, an ownership stake in the company was held by the firm Mateo Dizajn, which, according to the opposition, is owned by Klincharov himself.

This is a continuation of an older case - tenders awarded to Mateo Dizajn worth around 50 thousand euros. The State Commission for the Prevention of Corruption opened a case file on that one.

And here is the point that does not depend on whether the new accusation is confirmed.

The case has been open for more than a year

According to the opposition, the commission opened the case more than a year ago and has not closed it since. No finding has been announced. Nor has it been announced that there is no finding.

That is where every affair of this kind dies here. The opposition publishes, the government stays silent or denies, the commission opens a file, and then everybody waits. A year later, when nobody remembers the names of the companies any more, the case is quietly closed or simply never closed at all.

The difference between a state that has an anti-corruption commission and a state where the anti-corruption commission actually works is exactly that stretch of silence.

SDSM is demanding an urgent widening of the investigation and the tracking of every denar flowing towards the connected entities. That is a political demand and it is understandable coming from an opposition party.

But there is a second demand, and it is not a party one: that the commission say what it established in the first case. Not to hand either side a victory, but so that we know whether the institution works at all. The accusations have been made publicly and remain claims until the competent bodies verify them.

Until that happens, the only thing established with certainty is that one case file has been sitting open for more than a year.