Recommendations for visa-related tackling corruption are violated since the first day of implementation

One of the cases that participated in the set of subjects related to visa liberalisation has failed to be held Friday at the Constitutional Court in Pristina. At the request of lawyer Besnik Berisha, defender of Avni Alidaj, charged that in the quality of the executive director of the KED network, he has misused the official position, has been postponed [...]
One of the cases that participated in the set of subjects related to visa liberalisation has failed to be held Friday at the Constitutional Court in Pristina.
At the request of lawyer Besnik Berisha, defender of Avni Alidaj, charged that in the quality of the executive director of the KED network, he has misused the official position, judicial examination has been postponed in the case of electrical exchanges “Cohler”. In addition to Alidemaj, Vjollca Ajvazi and Drita Hamiti are also charged with misusing the official position.
According to Judge Shashivar Hoti, lawyer Berisha, on March 21st had presented a parachute with which he had sought to postpone this session, as being abroad and the same had considered the possibility of finding replacement but had failed.
This act of the lawyer, according to Judge Hoti, is unacceptable, since according to him, this subject requires priority after entering the subject group “LV” linked to visa liberalisation.
According to him, to be announced the court two days earlier is to regret that even the time of judges, as he has said, is very limited.
The next session in this case is scheduled on April 11, 2018.
Even prosecutor Hivzi Bajraktari has stated that another date be set since, according to him, on April 11th, there is another session scheduled for the entire day, but Judge Hoti has said the same should cancel all others and continue with this session.
The appointment of this session on April 19th is nine days longer than recommended on steps courts and prosecutors should take in corruption cases related to the visa liberalisation process.
In addition to this case on Friday, in all corruption cases that have monitored the “Justice Vow”, which were envisioned for today, but for various reasons had failed to be held, in none of them was respected the recommendation of KCK and KKP for the sessions not to be postponed over 10 days.
At the Foundation Court in Gjilan there have been three corruption hearings, which have ignored recommendations issued by the KDR and the KKP.
One session is scheduled on April 26th, after 34 days, one on April 23rd, after 31 days and one is scheduled on May 25th, after 63 days, respectively.
Two corruption hearings have been scheduled at Pec's Foundation Court. One is scheduled to be held on April 13, 2018, after 21 days, while the other is set to be appointed after the Court decides on defence proposals and prosecutors' objections.
The Gjakova Foundation Court has been a corruption hearing, where the same is scheduled to be held on April 6th, after 14 days, respectively.
By contrast, the Kosovo Judiciary Council (KGJK), the Kosovo Prosecutorial Council (KPK), the Chief Prosecutors of the Founding Prosecutors, as well as of Justice Minister Abelard Tahiri, had only a day earlier held a joint meeting for further steps to meet the condition for visa liberalisation, that of fighting corruption.
This meeting came one day after the Republic of Kosovo's Parliament has passed its draft Demarket Ratification with Montenegro.
During this meeting, six recommendations were made for further steps in fighting corruption.
“1. Keep regular monthly meetings in this composition, 2. There's co-ordination between Prosecutors and Courts, 3. Do not postpone sessions over 10 days, 4. To increase the number of judges at the Pristina Foundation Court, 5. The judges' limit for their participation in training and 6. Establishing transparency in relation to media and civil society” were these recommendations.
The Kosovo Criminal Procedure Code and the Law for Courts stipulates that judges are independent in the trial of subjects, and any outside intervention or influence is prohibited. Judges during the treatment of criminal subjects are obliged to comply with obligations issued by law.












