The court rejects Preten's indictment of the organisation Get Up

Under that decision, neither Preten nor the AKK will receive 150 thousand euros from the organisation “Arise”, who have charged him with slander over an event for contempt of the property of MPs that occurred in 2012.

The AKK indictment has been dismissed as illegal, meanwhile, that of Hasan Preteni has been rejected as unfounded.

The AKK had demanded from the “Arise” 50,000 euros, and Pretene 100,000 euros.

Callo. com has secured the bias by which the reasons for making this decision are clarified.

Always under the trial, the Court estimated that the AKK indictment was not allowed because on the basis of the Civil Law against Slander and Falty, public authorities are barred from applying for compensation for damage caused by slander or contempt.

Furthermore, in terms of Hasan Preten's indictment, the court says that by referring to administered evidence that the plaintiff's suit is not based, because the basis of the Civil Law is provided that public officials can apply for compensation from slander or contempt in private and exclusively in their personal capacity, but in concrete cases, the indictment has been exercised by the plaintiff Hasanten, while it was director of the AKK's management evidence proves that the plaintiff's statements at conferences and the mediums who were subjected to the quality of the institution are therefore not protected by the representative.

Thus, the institution's representative may seek judicial protection as an individual but not to sue in his official quality, but in the concrete case, the Court has found that plaintiff Hasan Preten has failed to argue with any evidence that the indictment's statement concerned him as an individual.

Consequently, under that decision, plaintiff Hasan Preteni has failed to argue with any evidence that indictees through their statements have violated his personality, because all evidence refers to the plaintiff as representative of the institution in the concrete case in the quality of the AKK director.

Likewise, plaintiffs Preteni and the AKK under this act are strongly obliged to compensate the indictees for the expenses of the contrary procedure in many of 1,393.60 euros after the full might of this act.

Disgruntled parties have the right to complaint in the 15-day term.

Preteni and the AKK in this trial are demanding 150 thousand euros from these defamation NGOs.

Preteni and AKK are seeking by the Court to issue a trial through which indictees “arise”, Lorik Bajrami and Artan Demhaja, representatives of this organisation, as well as Besnik Boletini from the Kosovo Centre for Investigative Journalism, solidically they are rewarded for the non-majtarial damage due to the slanders they have made to try to pay in total 150 thousand euros.

According to the indictment, representatives of the NGO “rise” in 2012 at a conference for media had declared Preteni has defended 7 deputies of the Kosovo Republic of Kosovo for not accepting property.

In this court process the plaintiff claims that the “arise” has slandered him for as long as he was director of the AKK.

According to the indictment, all of these statements presented at the media conference by the NGO “Arise” on February 16, 2012, have been published in the monthly newspaper “Preportr” in April 2012, on page 4, 5 and 6.

Pretenn claims he was offended by this publication by spreading false facts.

Furthermore, in the indictment he has claimed that this publication has attacked its personal values and thus seriously damaged its personal honor and authority as well as the AKK.

On the other hand, in response to the indictment, the organisation “arise” has demanded from the Court that Preten's indictment be rejected as unbaptised and unmanaged.

They called the law person's indictment unfair ( The AKK) and the physical person (Hasan Preteni), with the reasoning that Preten cannot appear to be damaged and at the same time as a physical person because CHAai is its director.

The scope of the first plaintiff and the second plaintiff is unclear, confused and irregular because the second plaintiff has no active legitimacy to represent the first accuser, except that he leads this organisation by law. Rather, there is conflict of interest because it wants through the first accuser to carry out a supposed moral reward from the slander he claims to have been made to him by the organization Getrea”, it is written in the answer to the indictment.

According to findings presented at the media conference on February 16, 2012, 7 deputies had not declared their property under the Law and declared no part of their businesses, “which they had to make”.

For these cases, “Arise” says the director of the Agency on a television promotion on December 6th 2011 had defended these deputies with the reasoning that they had not violated the Law, because businesses had passive and the same had no circulation and no activity.

Furthermore, according to indictees, the AKK's Preteni in the indictment has failed to clarify what slanderous actions were against the Agency and which were against the second accuser, Hasan Preten himself, and that the indictment does not specify when Preten refers to himself, when referring to his position or when referring to the Agency.

The “Arise” has been referring to Preten as director of the Agency, which has acted contrary to domestic rules, so that it violated the law and that the Pretenus in the quality of the director or its subordinates has forged official documents by interfering in form through which it legalised false restraint.