Supreme denies complaints against 14 convicts of bribery

The Supreme Court has refused as groundless requests for protection of the legality of 14 convicts for bribery.

Through a media communiqué, the Supreme has announced that the first-degree court has confirmed that “from the working schedule of the Regional Police Directorate and the Regional Traffic Unit patrol report, convicts, after stopping car leaders and having communicated with them, have explained the consecutively against the perpetrators, the sentence that could be pronounced, and with this case clearly specified the date and time when convicts have received sums of money in order to impose on the leaders against the non-versants, respectively, the sentences to be pronounced. ”

The communiqué says that the Supreme Court estimates that the first-degree court in the case of punctuation has applied directly to the provisions of the criminal law, and that the convicts have been convicted within the determined framework of the conviction for these criminal acts.

Full communication:

Pristina, June 20, 2022 A.H.1., S.H.2., A.M., A.B., H.S., B.S., B.C., N.H., R.H., S1.H.1., S.S., each alone because of the criminal act of taking bribes in succession and convicting A1.B.1., J.T. and Mr.S., because of the criminal offence of the bribe, has rejected as groundless requests for protection of convicted defenders and demands of convicts A.H.H., E.H.1., S.H.2., A.M., A.B., H.S., B.S., N.H., R.H., S1.H.1., S.S., A.B.1., J.T. and Mr. U.S., exercised against the act of the Constitutional Court in Mitrovica and the court's act of Kosovo Appeals.

The first-instance court has confirmed that by the day-to-day working of the Regional Police Directorate and the Regional Traffic Unit patrol report, convicts in succession, after having banned car executives and having communicated with them, they have explained the offense committed and the sentence that can be pronounced, and with this case clearly specified dates and time when convicts have received amounts of money in order to prevent anti-stractors from making their own claims, the sentences for counter-progressing.

The Supreme Court estimates that the first instance in the case of sentencing has applied directly to the provisions of criminal law, and convicts have been convicted within the determined framework of the conviction for these criminal acts, given the provision of Article 428 par.1 of the KPRC.