3 thousand euros fine against police accused of abuse during office, the other acquitted of prosecution

The Constitutional Court in Mitrovica has declared condemnation of Rrustem Mehmet-investigator at the Mitrovica Police Station, condemning him to 3 thousand euros in fine for mistreatment during the exercise of official office. While police official Teuta Mulliq has been acquitted of the prosecution.

The trial against the two indictees has been announced on September 12th 2023 by Judge Xhemajle Jusufi, reports “The Justice Act.

Mehmet and Muliqi were charged that in 2020, by misusing official duty or public authorisations, they had mistreated, frightened the injured N.B., violating its dignity.

In the trial provided by “Justice Vow”, it is said that accused Mehmet was initially sentenced to six months in prison.

But in support of Article 44 and, with his consent, his sentence is replaced by a fine of 3 thousand euros.

Mehmet is obliged to pay the expenses of the judicial procedure and 50 euros in the name of the judiciary and 20 euros on behalf of the crime victims' fund.

To accuse Mulliq, however, the costs of the procedure are charged with the court's budgetary means.

According to Article 7 and 360 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the Court has proven beyond any doubt that defendant Rrustem Mehmeti, on a critical day, given the exercise of official duties, as a police officer, had mistreated the oppressed N. B” says the argument.

It says that audio-incision, notes that the sole request of the injured was to provide a protector.

From material evidence, respectively, audio recordings -- the only request of the injured on that day -- was the commitment of a protector to protect the same. Therefore, on the grounds, the Court has found that the defendant has mistreated the injured by misusing his authorisations during the exercise of duties as police official”, it is further said.

The verdict states the defendant's actions were illegal, since it finds the defendant has offended the victim's personal dignity by insulting and using banal vocabulary. Thus, the defendant has violated the victim's personal dignity.

So the Foundation finds that the defendant has mistreated the injured by misusing his authorization during the exercise of duties as a police official.

While, concerning the second defendant, Teuta Muliqi, the court estimates that for taking free trial, the provisions from Article 363 have been based on Article 363 legal provision, paragraph 1, subparagraph 1.1 of the Penal Procedure Code, since it has estimated that in the actions of the defendant, the elements have not been fulfilled, whether general or specific, of the criminal act for which it was charged.

In addition, the indictment reportedly was not controversial that defendant Mulliq is official police in the investigation sector at the Police Station in Mitrovica.

Also, it was not contradictory that on the critical day, the same had been exercising official office and it was exactly what had been in charge of the injury case here. N., who in that procedure was suspected of a criminal offence against his ex-wife and that the entire incident of the critical day of the 2408.2020, had occurred at the police station's offices in Mitrovica, respectively, at the offices of the defendant”, the decision said.

However, according to the court, the contestant was whether elements of the criminal work he was charged with were consumed in the actions of the defendant.

According to the Court's assessments, with the gesture described as inaccusate for defendant Teuta “... while the defendant Teuta had ironicly smiled”, not the general or specific elements of the criminal act have been consumed.

Against this act, the disgruntled side has the right to complaint in the 30-day term from the day of the plea.

Otherwise, the Constitutional Prosecutor in Mitrovica on September 20, 2021 has filed an indictment against Rrustem Mehmet and Teuta Mulliq, arguing that on August 24, 2020, at the office of the Police Station in Mitrovica South, with abuse of office or authorisation they have mistreated, feared and severely offended the dignity of the other person, injured N.B.

According to the indictment, on the case of questioning the N.B. in Teuta Mulliq's office, since the same had asked him to clarify for what reason he was invited and told him that he did not want to issue a statement without a lawyer's presence, they have not read his rights to the accused, while the accused have begun to pressure and physical violence to make a statement.

In addition, the indictment says the defendant Rrustem told him: “Which lawyer is loving, Toma or Rhecaj, what are you, teachers like you have brought us here where we are now”. About an hour, however, no lawyer was provided.

All in accordance with the charge, defendant Rrustem Mehmeti had twice hit him in the back of his neck, committing physical violence, while the defendant Teuta was ironicly smiling.

On the other hand, it is said that the policeman Rrustem had put his hand on his mouth and told him that he would break his teeth or bones while the entire event was damaged by the N.B. He recorded it with a mobile phone.

Therefore, this charges that, in co-ordination, they committed criminal work “Consideration during the exercise of official duty or public authorisation”, by Article 195, par.1 of KPRK, in connection with KPRK Article 31.