Apel returns to retrial the case where 60-year-old was killed by his nephew

The court's communiqué states that the Constitutional Court act in Gjakova-Department for the Randa Crime, d.18.06.2024, has been annulled following complaints by the Constitutional Prosecutor in Gjakova, the Randa Department, authorised representatives of the damaged parties, the S.A. and the O.B., av. Ismet Tofaj, as well as defender of accused B.B., av. Noah Krasniqi.

The accused had been sentenced to 21 years in prison. He, with the court's special decision under special decision, will remain in custody.

The court has said the indictment of the 1806.204 date contains substantial violations. In reasoning of the indictment, the second-instance court has estimated that, the complaint act contains substantial violations of the criminal procedure's provisions, as well as other violations which condition his annulment. This court, following the assessment of all complaints exercised and according to official duty, has concluded that the criminal case which is judged, especially the issue of bias or judicial decision, should always be in harmony with the provisions of Article 384 paragraph 2 points of 2.7 concerning the Article 369 of KPPK, because the judgment issued should be understandable, clear, and in harmony with itself, as well as other parts of the judicial act, to give reasons for the crucial facts that characterize the criminal work that is imposed on the accused. Also, from the law records, the court has estimated that in this criminal case there has not been a review of the site, to confirm what actions were taken by the accused to carry out the criminal work, which is required to prove all part of the court, then the proposals put forward on the part of the parties to be tried, as well as to enforce the legal provisions, by respecting the rights of all parties in the procedure, and to create conditions that always bring the case to be judged entirely, the Apel.

Among other things, according to the court community, it has estimated that the court's act of first degree was involved in the substantial violation of criminal procedure provisions, which have influenced even the wrong and unfair proof of the actual situation, and that both of these violations have influenced the violation of criminal law, because the court of the first degree has failed to prove the elements of criminal acts that are burdened by the accused, to justify or to avoid the existence of the criminal act described as at the point of the prosecution, so it has come to an end in this case that the criminal case, the decision should be issued more just as it should be overturned, and the court's case overturned.