How much for state reserves: It's civil matter, trying to turn into criminal cases like revenge against the government.

He has added that the civil dispute is resolved in the competent court and then resolving the civil dispute determines whether there may be criminal or not.

So, realising the bonafide contract from MINT and failing to establish the contract by the economic operator in its entirety does not become a criminal tool but a sufficient basis for realising the damage in court. If such a decision is taken to the competent court in Kosovo, then this decision is recognised and executed in the country where the economic operator headquarters is located. ”

He has mentioned the case “Visianum”, which, according to him, was closed by the Special Prosecutor. In the end, he has said legal mechanisms for revenge are being misused.

For the end, the Special Prosecutor himself has closed the case of Vicianum (the property of corrective service given to a ten-year-old physical person, then registered as a legal person), where the contract is bound directly without any legal grounds, where state objectives were dropped, stressing in the case of throwing criminal evidence that there are procedures and civil violations, but not criminal. Once again, the same “special prosecutor” has made this move. So it's a mishandling of legal mechanisms for revenge, and nothing more! ”

Full Posting:

When the whole civilian-type issue is tried to turn into a criminal case as a form of revenge against government

When it links a contract with foreign elements, between the state and an international economic operator, in which the exact amount of goods to come, the price and the payment, and despite its failure to bring its goods or limited arrival to Kosovo, there can be no character other than civilian.

This civil dispute is resolved in the competent court in the contract. So the solution to the civil dispute determines whether there may be criminal acts in this case or not. As seen by evidence and evidence, the economic operator hasn't been bringing in the goods, and so the court can make a decision by forcing such an economic operator to pay off. That's why in any form there is no criminal responsibility.

So, realising the contract bonafide from MINT and not realising the contract by the economic operator in general is not a criminal tool but a sufficient basis for realising damage in court. If such a decision is taken to the competent court in Kosovo, then this decision is recognised and executed in the country where the economic operator headquarters is located.

If we were to go with the assumption that any non-realment of the contract or partial realisation of the contract would complete the figure of criminal action then all citizens of this country would be criminally responsible and eliminate civil rights as branch of law.

Finally, the Special Prosecutor himself has closed the case of Vicianum (the property of the correctional service given to a 10-year-old physical person, then registered as a legal person), where contract is bound strictly without any legal grounds, where state facilities have been dropped, underscoring in the act of throwing a criminal record that there are procedures and civilians, but not criminal.

Once again, the same “special prosecutor” has done this. So it's a mishandling of legal mechanisms for revenge, and nothing more!