Conjufca's penalty for tear gas, Court finds that the prosecution offered only assumptions

The court has found that the prosecution's claims that Glauk Konjufca has thrown tear gas are at the level of assumptions, since to prove his guilt had to present convincing evidence that the same ones have not appeared.

These findings have been provided by the Constitutional Court in Pristina, which has compiled the full sentence on the current chairman of the Parliament and clarified the reasons why he is not guilty of dropping tear gas, reports “The Justice Bet for”.

Following the court's ruling, Konjufca had said to be surprised by the decision to release him from the prosecution of shedding tear gas. He has claimed to have expected parole or fined sentences.

However, in the court's full trial provided by the “Justice Vow”, the contestant has initially reportedly turned out to be the fact of who put the tear gas after missing the prosecution's seizure report.

So the court reportedly acted on the basis of the “principle In Dubio Pro Reo”, which implies that no one can be found guilty without convincing evidence and that vague assumptions are interpreted in favor of the accused.

“In this context, the court estimates that the prosecution failed to prove the clear link of the accused to the use of the means of carrying out the criminal act, so it did not accept this as a confirmed fact, stressing that at any moment the gas tank was not proven by the accused, even by a datikoscopicisisis, in the act of prejudice.

On the other hand, the court ruling says that the burden of proven in connection with the guilty belongs to the prosecution, which in concrete cases the prosecution has failed to do the same

Also in the court's ruling, management of material evidence and hearing of witnesses has reportedly been able to connect with the evidence to manage it with the description of what happened in the indictment.

The court ruling also states that none of the witnesses has included accused Konjufca in criminal acts allegedly committed the same.

According to the court's ruling, witness statements are not in conflict with the practice of the European Court for Human Rights, since the prosecution itself was familiar with witness testimony.

On the other hand, the court ruling says that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of accused Konjufca even the standards created by the European Court of Human Rights.

The ruling also says that the guilt of Konjufca cannot be proven just because tear gas has been found in its seat, since, according to the court, this argument has no support in material evidence and that such a claim remains at the level of suspicion.

The court has also clarified that the prosecution has failed to establish that the gas tank was used by Konjufca.

According to the court these are the reasons by which it freed Konjufka from criminal acts “the use of a weapon or dangerous instrument”.

And the court for criminal work “preventing the official person from carrying out official office” has calculated the absolute prescription of the criminal act after having spent twice the time to try this criminal act.

The Constitutional Prosecutor in Pristina, on February 3rd 2017, has filed charges against Glauk Konjufca, which he charged with two criminal acts.

According to the indictment, Konjufca was charged with having a meeting in the Republic of Kosovo Assembly Hall, attended by Parliament Speaker Kadri Veselina, deputies Adem Grabovci, Ismet Beqiri, Sabri Hamiti, Pal Lekaj, Valdete Bajrami and Slobodan Petrovic, the same in the parliamentary quality, has been using weapons, so that during this meeting, he has thrown tear gas into the hall.

The Actakuza says that as a result, the participants' position has been hampered by smoke that has caused tear gas, and the same have been forced to abandon the hall, with what defendant Konjufca has come down against Article 9.1 of the No.04/12 law enforcement force in the Republic of Kosovo, where weapons use is banned.

With this, Konjufca was accused of committing criminal work “the use of weapons or dangerous tool” from Article 375, paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code, which is sentenced to jail for up to one to eight years.

While, according to the second device of this indictment, by date, at the time and place described as in the first device of this charge, defendant Konjufca during the use of tear gas has prevented officials such as Parliament Speaker Kadri Veseli, MPs Adam Grabovci, Ismet Beqiri, Sabri Hamiti, Pal Lekaj, Valdet Bajrami and Slobodan Petrov on the official duties, cerras of all officials have been forced to interrupt and leave the hall.

For this, Konjufca was accused of committing criminal work “Pinginging the official person during the performance of official duties”, defined by Article 409, paragraph 1 of the Penal Code, which is sentenced to imprisonment of three months to three years.