Appeal finally frees former directors of the Accreditation Agency of Corruption

Thus, with the decision taken on 26 August of this year, Apel has rejected the complaint exercised by the Special Prosecutor of the Republic of Kosovo (PSRK), which had asked Apel to annul the Constitutional Act and turn the subject into retrial.

On January 29, 2019, the Constitutional Court in Pristina had freed them from several points of prosecution, Basri and Armen Munja, as well as Ferdije Dushi-Etemi, while several other provisions had taken a rejection act of judgment.

As for indictees Basri Muja, Ferdije Zhuzhi-Etemi and Armendi Muja for abuse of office or authority, as well as accused Basri Muja for taking bribes, the first degree had taken a refusal act after prosecutor Naim Abazi, in the final address, was withdrawn from these points due to the absolute prescription.

The court's refusal bias had also declared against those accused of bribery Naim Braha, since for the same, criminal proceedings had ceased because of reaching the prescription deadline.

To point 6th and 7th of the file device in which Basri Muja, Ferdije Zushi-Etemi, and Amend Muja, who were accused of taking the following bribe, as well as accused Basri Muja of accepting bribes, the court had also received a reprobative bias because of the absolute prescription, reports “Betiming for Justice<1>.

About the points 3 and 4 of the indictment in which Basri Zushi-Etemi were charged with misuse of office or official authority, as well as Basri Muja of Zushi-Etemi for taking the ongoing bribe, as well as for criminal work on device 5 for abuse of position, as well as for the device of 9, where Basri Muja was accused of misuse of position, the first degree, in lack of evidence, had freed them from these charges, since according to them, it was not proven that these were criminal acts.

Not content with the foundation decision, The SPRK had complained in Apel, after claiming in her complaint, accused Basri Muja and Ferde Zushi-Etemi had committed the criminal acts they were accused of, and according to PSRK, proved with no positive recommendation for master's program for security studies for college I SPE, even though such recommendation had been given by foreign experts.

Also, according to the SPRK, the conviction of the accused was confirmed by the testimony of witnesses Avni Mazrek, Alate Berisha, as well as secret measures as video surveillance in public places, hidden monitoring of the talks in public places and the secret investigation the prosecution had implemented during the investigation.

However, these SPRK claims have dismissed the Court of Appeals as groundless, which has estimated that the act of the Foundation has proved true.

Kosovo's Supreme Appeals Court estimates that the court's act of first instance is not really involved in the wrong, not full of the actual situation claimed by the prosecution, but also those for which this court is obliged on official duty to consider. The first-instance court has given the reasons for the crucial facts by reasoning each separate and related evidence, by assessing the accuracy of the contrary evidence, the reasons for the failure to approve the concrete proposals of the parties by providing sufficient reasons in which it is based on the case for resolving this legal issue, and specifically the case of not proving the criminal act, as the first-instance court has decided on the face of Apel.

According to Apel's assessment, for criminal work under the III point lies the claim and assessment of the first degree court that it is only described the contents of the provision of KPRK's Article 422, but no one has described incriminating actions of the accused, on the grounds that they have decided that college should not in question discredit the higher checks.

As stated in Apel's decision, this cannot be viewed as incriminating action, especially the fact that experts' recommendations do not impose K The SC to act on the recommendation and that the KSHC has full academic and professional freedom in decision making.

“also K The SHC has a total of nine members and the leader who in the concrete case has been accused of Ferdije, but board members independently vote and, in concrete cases, has been decided not to discredit the master's programme in security studies, while accused Ferdije had the right to a vote out of a total 9 as long as the member board”, it is said in Apel's decision.

Also, Apel has dismissed the prosecution's claims that witness Avni Marzrek at a meeting was asked for a bribe, where the statement that accused Basri Muja had told Zushi-Etemi “Avniu did not take over the commitment properly to us that Zushi-Etemi had repeated “we had to pet a lot and increase the extent of the consequences, ”, according to Apel, these are the only words that were damaged, that were not actually tested, in the contrary, the Mazam was like the college owner of the College. SPE that had failed to perform financial obligations to the Accreditation Agency.

As for the point of the prosecution, where Basri Muja was accused of not discrediting the English program to the federal college “Univesum”, despite the positive recommendation of the expert team, so that the accused Basri has improved this recommendation in English has improved the word by not being recommended, Apel has come to the conclusion that no proof of what the final report was and what was recommended in the English version.

So it wasn't confirmed by any prosecution evidence of what the draft report was or the final report of the recommendation in the English version, which is confirmed by Professor Goodspeed's SMS, nor by the experts, that their names were known by what was the correct recommendation given in the draft report, but the prosecution has been made enough with a conscious SMS of the conversation between Professor Goodpeed and College Professor Universum Dehajam, for which witness Ap's reasoning has developed since the report was about nearing and social expert, the Apell, says the report.

Basri Muja was also charged with overcoming competencies in the case of employment in Albarana Leci-Begu, but according to Apel, the prosecution has offered no evidence that witness Albana Leci was not qualified for that job because the same one had qualifications and the commission was mostly assessed, and the counterligibility of this process was not proved by any evidence.

Otherwise, the Special Prosecutor's Act charges Basri Muja, Ferdije Zushie Étmin and Amend muaj for abuse of office, claiming they have caused damage to the amount of 2,50 000 euros, college “Biomedica” for accrediting four programmes. The charge according to the indictment of accused Basri Muja for not attracting accreditation for college in question has demanded 50,000,000 euros for the first year, 150,000 for the second year, and for the third year 50:50 for the profit.

The prosecution claims that defendants Basri Muja and Ferdije Dushie Etemi have also caused damage to the College “ISPE”, in a way that has sought cash profit for software accreditation. Initially, they have sought profit of 10,000.00 euros for a programme, while in 2011, they have demanded the amount of 20,000,000 euros.

Then, based on the indictment, the same in co-ordination is being charged with bribery, since accreditment of the College software “Universum” has benefited from $35,000.00.

The indictment also charged defendant Naim Braha, a shareholder at College “Vision for education” in Ferizaj, on bribery, as two programs' accredited the defendant's 10,000.00 euros has been handed over to defendant Basri Muja, but for criminal work in question, it has reached prescription and criminal procedures have been stopped.