Appeal confirms the sentence by which the two accused in the “case Subventions 4” were sentenced to 3 and a half years in prison and 7 thousand euros in fines

The Constitutional Court in Pristina, in accordance with the verdict of March 13th, 2024, sentenced Musolin to a unique sentence of 2 years and 6 months in prison and 4 thousand euros in fines, while Berisha was sentenced to a unique one-year prison sentence and 3 thousand euros in fines, reports the “Best for Justice“.

To the Foundation's decision, the complaint has been exercised by the defender of the accused Musol because of the verdict on criminal sanctions, with proposals that the Court of Appeals amend the complaint and the accused pleads bail.

Berisha's defender had also filed complaints because of the decision on criminal sanctions, with the proposal that Apelti's complaint act change it so that Berisha eases the sentence in six months in prison, with the argument that it will be real and sufficient.

However, the Appeals Prosecution has proposed that the defense complaints be rejected while the Constitutional Act is confirmed.

The Court of Appeals through the ruling compiled on August 28, 2024, estimated that even though the first degree court could not be complained because of essential violations of the criminal procedure provisions, however, it examined it on official duty and found that there are no essential violations of criminal procedure provisions or other violations that would necessarily condition its destruction.

Apel's decision states that neither the actual situation which has confirmed the first instance is disputed, so neither has the case been the assessment of this trial, and that it has not been able to counter it because the accused admitted the guilt the court had approved.

Regarding complaints of criminal sanction, Appeals has estimated that defenders' claims of a milder sentence are groundless.

The College of Appeals points out that the Foundation has praised extenuating and exacerbating circumstances in relation to the accused.

For Musol, as a serious circumstance, a degree of criminal responsibility has been taken, resulting in his taking direct action and the fact that criminal acts “bribe” and “Substitute” have carried them out consistently. On the other hand, extenuating circumstances have been taken over the accused's personal circumstances (the fact that he is the host of the family), the co-operation and correct conduct with the court and the prosecution organs, and deep repentance, the fact that he did not previously conflict with the law, and the admission of guilt.

On the other hand, for Berisha, it is said that serious circumstances have been taken on the basis of criminal responsibility, with the goal being to benefit rich. Even so, extenuating circumstances have been taken over the accused's personal circumstances (the fact that is the family holder), the co-operation and correct behaviour with the tribunal and the prosecution's organs, the repentance of committing criminal acts and the admitting of guilt. Similarly, the fact that it has not previously conflicted with the law.

Therefore, considering the circumstances mentioned above, the court has concluded that with the sentences pronounced, the effect and purpose of the sentence will be achieved. Apeli estimates that the unique sentences pronounced against the two indictees are proportional to committed criminal acts, and that the sentences pronounced will affect the prevention of indictees in the future to commit criminal acts and become their rehabilitation.

The second rate estimates that extenuating and extenuating circumstances are applied directly in the concrete case, except for the direct will of the accused, because Apel estimates that this circumstance cannot be deemed burdensome.

“... I take on the fact that wanting in the concrete case is an element of the criminal act, because these criminal acts are committed solely on purpose, so the college does not perceive this circumstance as important because it would consist of doubling the circumstances, and that the very element of the criminal act would be assessed even as a serious circumstance”, the decision said.

The Appeals College does not accept the alleged defenders of the accused that they have not been deemed towards extenuating circumstances for their defenders and that the accused have pleaded guilty, the repentance expressed for the deeds committed, the family circumstances that the accused are holding their families, and the promise that in the future they will not commit criminal acts.

According to Apel, these circumstances were considered from the very first degree, so the claim is unsubstantiated.

Therefore, the Court estimates that the sentences pronounced against the accused by the court of the first degree are in harmony with the intensity of the social risk of committed criminal acts and the degree of criminal responsibility of the accused as executed, and with the intensity of the risk or consequences caused, and that the accused will be prevented from committing criminal acts in the future, as well as preventing other persons from performing criminal acts<1>, it is said at the end.

The two accused had pleaded guilty to the initial session held on February 12th 2024.

Foundation Court in Pristina, in case known as “Subventions 4”, accused Halit Berisha, and John Mussol had convicted them on February 16, 2024.

Otherwise, the charges are also: Hasan Magaraj, Luan Statovci, Berat Nika, Sabit Shkodra, Musa Neveocazi, Bajram Gashi, Pajtim Krasniqi and Lulzim Hajdari, for whom the judicial process follows.

According to the indictment filed on November 23rd 2023 by the PSRK, it is said that between August 25th 2020 and February 24, 2021, defendant Hasan Maharaj in the quality of the official person at the Directorate for Agriculture in the Istog Community, has directly and consistently accepted bribes from John Musol to act contrary to official office.

It says that John Musolley had applied for subsidies in this municipality using personal data by family member Edward Mussollaj, and during the screening check notes that the application was done illegally. After that, it is said in the indictment that to settle this case, Hasan Maharray requires 4 thousand euros in bribes, which Musol agrees with. After the Agriculture Development Agency approves the payments, John Musol accepts the subsidy money and hands over the required bribe to defendants Hasan Maharaj.

With the approval of the second half of the subsidy, according to the indictment, John Musol handed the second part of the bribe to defendant Maharray for the worth of 4 thousand euros in his cattle shop in Istog.

The indictment says that by the same date, John Musolley applies for subsidies to the Istog Community on behalf of the other family member, Louis Musolaj. Although even this application was illegal, after gaining subsidies, the indictment writes that Hasan Maharray receives bribes from John Musolly, worth 7 thousand euros.

At the next point of the indictment, John Musolly reportedly had prepared documentation to apply subsidies on behalf of family member Leonard Musollaj and defendants Hasan Mahzaraj ask him to change requests on the application form by filling in incorrect data in exchange for granting bribes to half the benefit.

Always according to the indictment, the two defendants present inaccurate data that there is a culture of medicinal and fragrant plants and benefits 7 thousand euros of 537 euros, while the second tranche does not approve the Agency for Agriculture Development, thus not fully realised the bribery agreement.

The second point of the indictment, says defendant Hasan Maharray in the quality of the official person directly accepts rich profit from John Musol to influence officials of the Agency for Agriculture Development in order to speed up payments and money of subsidies to be approved.

After the payment approval, the indictment charges Hasan Maharray with accepting 2 thousand euros in bribes from John Musol at his shop in Istog.

The Actakuza says that from February 3rd 2021 to February 10th 2021 in Pristina and Fushe-Kosovo, defendants Luan Statovci as director of Direct Paying and Berat Nica, direct payment officer at the Agency for Agriculture Development, in co-chairment in the quality of official persons, accept bribes from Halit Berisha through Pajtim Krasniqi to act in opposition to the official post.

Always according to the indictment, Halit Berisha and Pajtim Krasniqi had applied for more inaccurate subsidies, and Berat Nika seeks and accepts bribes worth 7 thousand euros after the two upper ones approved payments.

The prosecution claims that after the decision on the second half of the payment execution, the verdict grants 5 thousand euros to Berat Nica, which shares with Luan Statovci. As for the rest, Berat Nica reportedly accepts 2 thousand euros in bribes to his residence by Pajtim Krasniqi, which shares Luan Statovci as well.

The prosecution says that between November 13th 2020 and February 24th, 2021, in Pristina, Luan Statovci with Sadat Shkodra, who was official for direct payment at the Agency for Agriculture Development directly and indirectly request bribery from Visar Krasniqi, to act in accordance with the official task.

According to the PSRK, Visar Krasniqi had applied for subsidies, but with the argument that if the documents are not in order, Luan Statovci indirectly asks for bribes, while Sadat Shkodra does so directly. It writes that after that, Sadat Shkodra meets with a Wisar Krasniqi family member and asks for 30 thousand euros in bribes to be carried out.

While for defendant Lulzim Hajdaraj, the indictment says that on December 6, 2020, as a technical inspector accepts bribes from John Musol to act contrary to official duties. During the search for subsidies application on behalf of Leonard Musollaj, according to the indictment defendant Lulzim Hajdaraj, along with his colleague, Blerim Mulliq, find inconsistencies in the actual state of the field. The two officials are charged with drawing false reports that the situation is in order and accepting 500 euros in bribes from John Musolly, which they share.

The Act set up by the PSRK says Musa Nikovazi as technical inspector along with colleague Bajram Gashi on October 6th 2020 has conducted checks on the subject where the application for subsidies was made on behalf of Edward Musallaj and find inconsistencies in the actual situation with the ground. According to the indictment, they had found that the property displayed on the app was Istog's municipality.

Thus, while defendant Bajram Gashi stood in the car, Lulzim Hajdaraj was charged with accepting 500 euros in bribes from John Musol to present the situation as okay.

Also, it is said that even during the review of the course on behalf of Luig Musolaj, defendants Musa Nikovazi and Bajram Gashi note that the property presented in the course was the Dubrava Foreign and Cooperative Community. Thus, the two defendants are charged with accepting 500 euros in bribes from defendant John Musolly to present the situation in order.

With these actions under the indictment, John Musolley illegally benefits in the course of Luigi Musolaj subsidy worth 4 thousand and 500 euros and subsidies worth 12 thousand and 600 euros in the subject in the name of Edward Musallaj.

According to the indictment filed by the PSRK, the 10 accused are all charged with committing criminal acts “taking bribes”, “The impact”, “duty monotheism”, “assist in the criminal act taking bribes”, “Britomif brib <8>, as well as <x10M> Subenty@x11> /Betimy for Justice