Court of Appeals Runs Becir Kaluldra scandals in condemning VV activists

KA LXO.com brings exclusively the decision of the Court of Appeals.

The second instance of justice, ruling in the complaints of protecting the accused but also the Prosecutor's, has found that the prosecution device is unintelligible, unclear, and there is a contradiction in its interior because the court does not provide clear and complete reasons regarding the crucial facts.

The trial does not provide clear and complete reasons and in terms of crucial facts there are contradictions between what is presented in the reasoning of the bias regarding the content of the documents and the processes and statements given in procedure”, the Appeals decision states.

In this direction, the Court of Appeals uses a rather harsh language, finding that regarding the accused, Frasher Krasniqi, Adea Batusha, Atthe Arifi and Egzon Haliti.

The trial does not provide fair assessment of the evidence and the bias does not compile the evidence issued according to Article 361 paragraph 1 and 2 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Moreover, the entire first-degree court described in its trial by providing no analysis of the evidence it was based on, the incriminating actions of the accused for the criminal work for which they had been convicted”, describes the Appeal Act.

The Court of Appeals also gives special attention to the case of the silent defence of the accused and the assessment of the Constitutional Court over Father and Arifi's statement that had bought the engine with which the prosecution claims the attack was carried out in the Kosovo Assembly.

“Based on the statement of the accused, Father and Arifi, who at the detention hearing on August 31st 2016 does not accept the performance of the work but acknowledges that he bought a red-colored engine, while the court from this admission made at the detention hearing concludes that the attack was carried out on the Kosovo Parliament and the accused not to be faced with such evidence were protected in silence by the court that these were the head of the criminal work in opposition to other evidence in the letters that are not administered by the court but mentioned only in the process, described in the case of the Applefi. KALLXO.com.

The Court of Appeals estimates that Pristina's Constitutional Court has necessarily had to watch videos taken in public places and other material evidence under judicial scrutiny.

However, Apel estimates that even if it was taken for granted by Father and Arifi's declaration, it could not be used as evidence against the other accused because the declaration of the co-independent cannot be taken as evidence in joint procedure.

Also special attention, Appeals gives identification to accused by witnesses under judicial examination but also to the investigation procedure.

“The Court of Appeals estimates that witnesses Hesset Ramadani, Naser Mustafa and Remzi Zogjan, who have been heard in judicial examination regarding the identification of persons indicted through the photographs, all identically have claimed they are not sure if the accused are both Father and Arifi and Egzon Haliti are the persons who bought the motorcycle “Yamaha” and is the charge of Adea Batusha that bought the branding phone “Samsung” whose phone after the attack has been sent message”, says the Appeal decision.

The appeal has also found a series of violations that were made in the process of identifying indictees in the investigation procedure.

The other violation the Court of Appeals has found has to do with regard to the RPG missile launcher that, according to the prosecution, has been used to carry out the attack on the Kosovo Assembly.

“Linked to rocket launching of the RPG type, the court gives no crucial evidence of how the missile rocket launcher could be fired higher than the engine, which is in motion, or is fired with rocket launching in position when the engine is stopped, that is because the court does not provide any details about the rocket, what gun it is, can any person use it, has high precision, and does it require high professional ability to use this weapon”, the Apel decision is said.

In November last year the Constitutional Court in Pristina had sentenced At and Arifin to 6 years in prison; MP Frasher Krasniqi to 8 years in prison; Egzon Haliti with five and a half years in prison, as well as Adea Batusha to two years in prison.

These four were charged that last August 4th of the year in co-ordination had attacked the Kosovo Parliament, so criminal acts of terrorism were charged upon them, the act seen in Article 136 of the Kosovo Criminal Code, while in this case qualified according to paragraph 1 of this article, punishable by no less than 5 years in prison.

All have been released from custody.