Appeal brings back the issue where Sami Kurteshi has been charged with slander and insults by the former head of the CEC Secretariat

With the act of July 1st 2021, the Constitutional Court in Pristina had wrongly dropped the lawsuit of plaintiff Halimi against indictees Kurteshi, by which he had demanded 25 thousand euros, on behalf of slander and insult, reports the “Bet on Justice”.

To that decision, the plaintiff Halimi, who was approved as the foundation of Apel and with the decision of May 30, 2023, turned the matter into restoration.

The prosecution of Pristina's Enis Halimi, the Pristina Constitutional Court Act in Pristina- the General Department of July 1st 2021, and the case is returned to the same court in review and re-visit”, the Apel Act said.

The indictment was exercised in January 2020, where plaintiff Halimi claims Kurteshi has issued false data, has been slandered and insulted, and has been severely damaged by his honour and authority, demanding from the indictee the compensation of material and immatial damage in the amount of 25 thousand euros.

In the act provided by “The Act of Justice”, Appel has reportedly estimated that the position of the first-degree court is not fair and legitimate, since the accepted act has been included in violations of the provisions of the conflict procedure by Article 182, LPK's paragraph 1, concerning Article 5.4 of the Civil Law Against Slander and Fry, under which it is determined: “Autories are prohibited from offering compensation for the damage caused by and insult. Public officials may apply for compensation of damage caused by slander and privately and exclusively insult in their personal capacity”.

In the ruling, it is said that the first-degree court has wrongly interpreted and implemented the supreme legal provision, as legal conditions have not been met in concrete cases to bring the plaintiff's indictment to the foreground.

On the other hand, it is said that the first degree court has subsequently wrongly decided that the plaintiff's indictment would be nullified due to lack of legal base.

At the end of this act, Appeals has instructed the first-degree court to eliminate overexplored wrongdoing so that the procedural conditions for keeping the trial are met and to make a fair and complete decision based on the actual situation.

On the other hand, it is said that based on the subject papers the plaintiff had filed charges of slander and insult in the quality of his personal physical-capacity against the indictee, which allows legal provisions and had not exercised the indictment in the capacity of the public official or in the name of the institution he represents.

By contrast, plaintiff Enis Halimi in this case is represented by the authorized representative, Leutrim Syla, who in a pronouncement for “Justice bet”, said that by the Court of Appeals' decision, it is seen that the slander case was interpreted differently from the Foundation.

The Court of Appeals' ruling has been seen as having made a difference in the case of slander, in which some way it was interpreted differently by the Pristina Foundation Court, where the Constitutional Court has first interpreted that the civilian person who worked at the public institution has no right to file a slander indictment because it may be considered an indictment at the public institution. But the law is clear, when persons like this indictment present personal and individual capacity... for such lawsuits, which the case of non-passing is, because that indictment has only filed for slander against him, namely, individually”, Syla said.

He added that Facebook status, indicates that indictee Kurteshi when he did the alleged slander, while stressing that the session is not yet scheduled.

There is no point in sequencing, because there are various expressions that we have considered to be slander and insult. The main point in the case is that slander is against the person, not against the institution, even though it has dismissed the Constitutional Court as the pale, the Court of Appeals has considered it illegal and it has broken into the retrial and somehow filed the case on whether it is the fair indictment against the institution of the lawyer, Syla said.

The “Justice Vow” has attempted to receive a comment from Kurteshi himself regarding this case, but the same has not responded.

Otherwise, under the verdict of July 1st 2021, the Constitutional Court in Pristina has dismissed the lawsuit of plaintiff Halimi against indictees Kurteshi, by which he had demanded 25 thousand euros on behalf of slander and insult

According to the indictment exercised on January 27, 2020, plaintiff Enis Halimi indicted Sami Kurtesh for compensation for the damage.

The indictment reportedly during October 2019 in Kosovo during the month, early elections have been organised for the Assembly of the Republic of Kosovo, during which period the plaintiff has exercised his post as chief executive of the CEC Secretariat.

In addition, the indictment reportedly reportedly tally of election results had run into some technical problems in the stalemate, which had made it necessary to recount a large portion of the ballot boxes, for which the counting process and the proclamation of final results had been extended until November 7th.

The plaintiff in the indictment claims that a few days before declaring the final result, indictee Sami Kurteshi in his personal account on the social network “Facebook”, you'd grossly slander and insult the plaintiff, and also called “kriminal shaved”, then his actions as “created by presumption”, and “an ignorant or criminalized bureaucratic”.

Thus, based on Civil Law Against Slander and Oppression and the Law on Obligations, the plaintiff has asked the court to prove that indictee Sami Kurteshi slandering and insulting has proved false to the plaintiff with whom he has seriously damaged the plaintiff's honour and authority.

He has also demanded that the indictee be forced to pay over the compensation of moral damage to the spiritual pain experienced by slander to '%s' to pay the plaintiff 15 thousand euros, while for the material amount of 10,000 euros, with legal interest of 8%, as well as the costs of the procedure.