Lumez responds to former Supreme Chief for statements about Agnis Tetaj's murder

Lumez's reaction reportedly disagrees with Hasan's findings and interpretations, without enough said and carefully verified.

“On this occasion, State Prosecutor Alexander Lumezi respects free opinion, but it is by no means incompatible with the findings, interpretations and individual criminal case by former Supreme Court Chairman Fyzulah Hasani, without sufficient information and carefully verified”, said in the response of the chief state prosecutor.

In his response, Lumez says he is reportedly redefining the course to another prosecutor is not in line with the personal expectations of the former Supreme Chief.

“We are reported that the State Chief Prosecutor's decision to re-assign this subject to another prosecutor is not in line with the personal expectations of the former Supreme Court chairman, so he unfoundly counters the State Prosecutor's institution”, said in response.

Also, in the response of the chief state prosecutor, the ruling of the former Supreme Court's head in a case that has not yet been made, is a direct intervention in the work of the Prosecutor and the Court.

Moreover, such a ruling on a criminal case by the former head of the Supreme Court of Kosovo for which the court ruling has not yet been taken constituted direct intervention in the work of the Prosecutor and the Court. Therefore, prosecutors and judges should be allowed to work independently and professionally, thus showing respect for duties carried out by criminal justice professionals”, the response is said.

This is the full response:

Pristina, 15 April 2021 ♫ The chief state prosecutor's office reacts to former Kosovo Supreme Court Chairman Fyzullah Hasani's statements, “Agonis Tataj's murder/ Fejzullah Hasani believes it occurred out of carelessness, throws criticism over judiciary chief prosecutor”, given the date 13.04.2021 in “DTV” and published yesterday on the date 14,04.2021 on the portal “Indexline”

In this case, State Chief Prosecutor Alexander Lumezi respects free opinion, but it is by no means incompatible with the findings, interpretations and individual criminal case discussions by former Supreme Court Chairman Fyzullah Hasani, without sufficient and carefully verified data.

We are reported that the State Chief Prosecutor's decision to re-assign this subject to another prosecutor is not in line with the personal expectations of the former Supreme Court chairman, so he unfoundly attacks the State Prosecutor's institution.

As for naming and redefining the criminal offence from serious murder in carelessness, this quality remains in the hands of prosecutors of the case to decide on the Penal Code provisions and other evidence collected during the investigation phase, as the case has not yet been declared completed in judicial review.

Moreover, such an agreement on a criminal case by the former head of the Supreme Court of Kosovo for which the judicial decision has not yet been taken constituted direct intervention in the work of the Prosecutor and the Court. Therefore, prosecutors and judges should be allowed to work independently and professionally, thus showing respect for duties carried out by criminal justice professionals.

It is meaningless how the former Supreme Court chairman could be released and suggest that we have to do with serious murder or murder by carelessness for such an important and sensitive case of public opinion without reading and examining the subject papers in detail?

On the other hand, if former Supreme Court chairman demands disciplinary responsibility for the chief state prosecutor for exercising legal competencies concerning redefining this case

To another prosecutor, should ethical and moral responsibility be required from him for professional suggestions of intent and in full opposition to facts and legal provisions in this case?

I cannot expect from the former Supreme Court of interpretations and legal opinion that did not comply with the State Prosecutor's Law.

If the former Supreme Court president has not been informed of the State Prosecutor's Law provisions, I would like to remind him that on the basis of Article 11, paragraph 2, of this law, which, due to professional inability, neglect or conflict of interest, the State Prosecutor is allowed at any time to take any case from any prosecutor and reassign it to another prosecutor with an effective development of procedure or for other important reasons.

I want to remind him that the State Attorney does not bring any decision based on anyone's desire and expectations, but only on the legal provisions.

In both this case and in all other cases, until I am the chief state prosecutor will decisively make decisions to serve justice and no one else.