Court Makes Decision for Ex-Teacher by Prizren Suspected of paedophilia

The court has assigned him 30 days in custody, following request made by the prosecution.

“Cate detention measures against a (1) defendant, due to suspicion based on having committed criminal work offering pornography to persons under 16 years of age (16) years. Prizren, April 29, 2022 ) The Foundation Court in Prizren, the General Department, the trial judge of the procedure, Gani Kastrati, has appointed the length of detention in length of (1) months. The court, in case of the detention measure against the defendants, has estimated that there are legal reasons for the detention measure, and from the evidence collected until this stage, is a suspicion given that the defendant has committed the criminal work he allegedly allegedly committed, said in the communique.

Full communication:

The detention measure is set for a (1) defendant, due to suspicion given that he committed criminal work offering pornography to persons under 16 years of age (16)

Prizren, April 29, 2022 ʹThe Constitutional Court in Prizren, the General Department, Procedure Judge Gani Kastrati, has appointed the length of detention of a (1) month, which will be calculated from the time of the arrest of 28.04.2022 and may last to 27.05.2022, against defendants F.K., because of suspicion of having carried out the criminal work of offering pornography to persons under the age of 16th from Article 231 par.1 of the Republic of Kosovo.

The court, in case of the detention measure against the defendants, has estimated that there are legal reasons for the appointment of the detention measure, and from evidence collected until this stage, is a doubt that the defendant has committed the criminal act allegedly.

Will these facts be argued, however, in the further stages of criminal procedure.

In the case of the detention assignment, the Court has taken into account the heavy burden of criminal acts, and the fact that the defendant has not appeared in the police at the invitation of

regular, this points to the risk of releasing the same defendant to freedom and preventing the course of criminal responsibility.

From tops, the Court has concluded that the appointment of detention at this phase of procedure is necessary and reasonable.

Note: Against that decision, the dissatisfied side has the right to complaint, at the Court of Appeals, complaints against this act did not delay his execution.