Iber-Lepenci Canal Banction Request rejected

This was made known on the basis of Apel's decision, which was secured by Vice. Appeal Court Manager for “Justice Vow”.

Paralysely, the Constitutional Court in Pristina had assigned the detention measure to defendants D.V in length of 1 month, due to the same suspicion as it had committed criminal work “The re-regarding of constitutional order with destruction or damage to public installations and equipment” by Article 122 and “the chairmanship of terrorist work by Article 129 and Article 128, paragraph 1, under paragraph1.8, as well as possession, unauthorized or possession of arms, of 366 KPR.

In this regard, Vicentijevic's defender, lawyer Deleviq, has filed complaints with the Court of Appeals, claiming that this ruling has violated legal provisions, as well as misadvising the actual situation, thus demanding the approval of the complaint and the release of Vicentijevic from the move.

Lawyer Delevic has stressed in complaint that there is no evidence against his defense that supports the suspicion that he has performed the works he is charged with.

Tuje, he has stressed that the prosecution's evidence on Vicentijek's suspicion has carried out the attack is based on finding weapons and wet boots in his house, where, according to him, it is only a suspicion of criminal possession, control or unauthorized possession of weapons.

While, in terms of the claim that the protected one would escape, the complaint attorney has stressed that the same is a citizen of the Republic of Kosovo, has all his wealth here, has nothing in Serbia, and remains financially weak, which makes his flight impossible.

This complaint has been rejected by the Appeals Prosecution, which has demanded that this complaint be rejected as unfounded.

Based on Apel's reasoning, the same had found that there is doubt about the deeds it is tasked with, as two AK47 guns, a gun, three stuffed and three empty zoos, three hand grenades, and 100 ammunition have been recovered.

Given that, the decision is said to have the legal condition in this phase of the procedure to continue measures for the defendant's security.

Also, Appeals noted in the decision that the findings of these weapons in the defendant's home increase the likelihood of the same crime repeat, given the same fact that it is redecivist, and that he is suspected of the criminal work “severe murder”.

Also highlighted in the reasoning of the decision is the risk that has engulfed the country during this attack, with which supply of essential things such as drinking water and electricity is endangered.

On the other hand, in the court's argument regarding the lawyer's claims that to his defense, the legal conditions of continuing the detention measure have not been met, Apel has stressed that based on the subject's papers, the defendant has taken action in the direction of carrying out the burdensome work.

“Colegi estimates decisions as based because of the subject paperwork that the defendant has taken action in carrying out the criminal act, which connects with the defendant with other acts that are under way and specified as in the complaining decision. So for now, from the evidence in the subject's evidence is a suspicion based on the commission of alleged criminal acts as in the complaining decision.”.