<x0) i SIS and syphyr over and over again with Coca-Cola

Punishments for terrorism who wanted to enjoy the syphyr under the flag I SISI drinking Coca-Cola on the shores of Badovci Lake has been found guilty by the Pristina Foundation Court.

Enis Latifi's loyalty, Milazim Haxhija, Gazmend Haliti and Fehmi Musa will serve more than 18 years in prison for the event, which caused water failure and a lot of panic in the country's capital.

On the evening of July 10th 2015, a guard from Lake Badovci had noticed suspicious movements near the water collectors' beaches. Two cars and some people were spotted in suspicious movements around the lake.

The call to the police had made the cars stop and the participants bet. The case, apparently seen as a suspicion at the moment, proved to be something special prosecutor Drita Hajdari would call “Dukuri imported from outside”.

All by chance, the guards and police discovered the plan of the supporters of I SIS to take pictures with the terror flag on the shores of Pristina Lake. Military uniforms, masks, and a Kalashnikov had been discovered along with the flag.

The police also found out what was the key element of the case, an Arabic - language letter marking the group's commitment to the ISIS leader.

We swear to teachers, religion fighter Abu Baker el Hyseyin al Krumiti el Baghdad for obedience and to enforce orders in difficult cases to sacrifice“, it was written in a letter provided by police.

The data provided by this raid led the Prosecutor to believe the group had terrorist intent.

In their defense, the accused had denied the intention of causing fear.

One of the group members had claimed that the group's goal was to eat eye contact.

“We were supposed to pass an eye out with the hamburgers.

The target plan had led to panic among citizens. The group's arrest had become international news, while authorities conducted detailed water tests to verify whether the water had been poisoned.

Although the lake was preserved a time of strict safety and water supply was temporarily cut off, police raids resulted in fear of poisoning the lake, as was fear of destruction of the lake dam. After claiming that one of the accused had worked early on this object.

The Basis of Actakuza

However, although no poison was found, a letter was later found in which the oath of loyalty to I leader was sworn. SIS Abu Becker Al-Baghdad. According to the Prosecutor's Office, the goal was to shoot a video and publish it online with the intention of witnessing the alignment of I SIS in Kosovo.

This found later became the backbone of the Kosovo Special Prosecutor's Act, which was represented by prosecutor Drita Hajdari, who faithfully of Enis Latif, Milazim Hadziaj, Gazmend Halit of Betim Ibrahimajn, accused them of preparing terrorist acts against Kosovo constitutional order, according to Article 144 paragraph 4 concerning Article 1 about Article 145 and Article 135 subgraphy 1.7 according to the Kosovo Penal Code of 10 to 20 years.

The sixth indictee Fehmi Musa was accused of helping him commit a crime.

In the trial that lasted close to a year, prosecutor Drita Hajdari tried to argue before the court the guilt of the accused by calling the unfortunate importation of a phenomenon as dangerous as terrorism in Kosovo.

These claims were denied by all five indictees who were declared innocent throughout the process. As for accused Betim Brahimaj, the whole case remains clouded because he never appeared before the court on this occasion and continues to flee.

Even the accused, Fehmi Musa, in his guilty defense for Kosovo citizens' trip to Syria, made former foreign affairs minister Enver Hoxhaj, calling for aid to the opposition Syrian.

Judgment in much of it was closed because a protected witness was heard. While the case was carried out relatively quickly for the average length of Kosovo's judgments after the Pristina Constitutional Court issued its first decision regarding the case on July 18, 2016.

Last July 18th of last year, the Pristina Constitutional Court consisting of juro members, with Judge Valbona Musliu-Selimaj and members Faik Hoxha, who is currently a lawyer and Nora Blaca-Dula currently judge at the ApelAlbanians about half a century in prison against the accused.

Under the court's ruling, Besnik Latifi was sentenced to 13 years in prison, Gazmend Haliti to 12, Milazim Hadziaj to 10 years and 3 months, Fehmi Musa to 4 years, and Enis Latifi to 10 years in prison.

Defence lawyers called these sentences scandalous, while disgruntled, addressed the Court of Appeals, which, after the hearing held in November last year, confirmed in all the decision of the first-degree court.

Entrusted that the Constitutional Court's decision was not fair, lawyers were addressed at the request for protection of the Supreme Court of Kosovo as the latest instigation of regular courts in Kosovo.

About five months after the Court of Appeals was established in April 2017, the Supreme Court of Kosovo restored the case to its starting point after finding a string of substantial violations of the Kosovo Criminal Procedure Code provisions.

The Supreme Court ruled they were based on claims to protect the legality in which the shortcomings of the disputed convictions related to the vagueities of the first degree Action device and the failure to provide legal reasons for the key elements of the criminal act” were only one of the remarks recorded by the Supreme Court of Kosovo.

Listing also a series of violations by the Constitutional Court and Appeals, the Supreme Court ordered that the subject be handled more carefully in the retrial.

“anyway must reason on the purpose of causing general risk or arson and the purpose of sending armed groups, equipment, other material resources to or from outside the Republic of Kosovo in order for the criminal law to be applied fairly”, was ordered in the Supreme Court's decision.

KA LLXO.com exclusively reported on all the performance of this process, but also the ruling of the Supreme Court of Kosovo.

Aktakuza Change in Retrial

Acting on the guidelines of the Supreme Court of Kosovo in its final speech in the retrial, prosecutor Drita Hajdari changed the indictment against the accused.

Prosecutor Hajdari changed the legal qualifications, so she gave up Article 135 more precisely from paragraph 1.7 of this article in which the arson was presented and the triggering of general danger as two elements the prosecutor had linked to the conduct of criminal acts of terrorism.

Defence lawyers reacted to this change, saying that after this change, the indictment has become unstable and that it has lost its basis.

Even fierce debates accompanied the final word hearing, so that prosecutor Drita Hajdari said that “hopes lawyers will not regret their protection in this case”, citing the performance of terrorist acts in several European countries.

Lawyer Tmava strongly rejected that claim, saying that in 46 years of experience he has never regretted any of his actions, since he has not acted on double standards and assumptions.

After hearing all he had to say about chance from the parties just one day different from the date when the first act of judgment was pronounced, the Pristina Constitutional Court declared the new judgment on July 19, 2017.

Except for the distinction on the juro, which now, besides President Valbona Musliu-Selimaj, was made up of judges Valon Kurtaj and Vesel Ismajli, substantial differences were also in the sentences pronounced.

The court re-qualified acts claimed by the prosecutor from preparing terrorist acts in the press in carrying out the terrorist acts remaining in the effort.

As a result of the court's re-recognition of works, the sentences suffered drastic decline.

Faithful Latifi was sentenced to four years and six months in prison, while Gazmend Haliti, Milazizim Hadziaj, Enis Latifi was sentenced to 3 years and 6 months, while the accused of helping commit the attempted criminal work Fehmi Musa was sentenced to 3 years in prison.

Thus, one of the most controversial terrorism processes in Kosovo found the epilogue by the Court of First St.

On the other hand, prosecutor Drita Hajdari, who in the retrial except that she changed the act, failed to present any new evidence, did not present herself in declaring the bias to have the opportunity to get her opinion on the decision.