The appeal makes the decision for the third time for “Currin”, sʹe deems the bail revocation reasonable

The case concerns the criminal case where Ismet Osmani, along with Sami Nika, Ilir Boyka and Mentor Maqan are accused of committing criminal acts “Fade” and “tasking”, while accused Adil Thaci is tasked with criminal work “MAKE”, reports the “Bet on Justice”.

We remember that Osman had missed the July 1st 2024 session, the hearing in which, with the prosecution's proposal of the Armen Hamiti case, and after assuming Osman's defender, lawyer Besnik Berisha, a 50,000-euro bail was taken.

Regarding this decision of the Foundation in Pristina, Appeals had turned the issue into a two-time restoration, originally on July 15, 2024, and later on August 6, 2024.

In both cases when Appeals had turned the matter into restoration, the Foundation had clarified that Osman has been absent at the July 1st 2024 session, in which the lawyer Berisha session has clarified that for other circumstances of family trouble and health causes, he has not introduced himself in the trial.

The Foundation had also clarified how the Court did not possess any medical report on which Apel had turned the matter into restoration with the reasoning that no medical reports were analysed without having mastered the same foundation.

Also, the first instance in its recent decision has clarified that Osman is on the run for another case and that it is by lawyer Berisha himself that it does not turn out Osman does not present himself in the trial for health reasons, but in the other case he is on the run.

Therefore, according to the court, the fact that Osman had been replaced with 50 thousand euros in bail, and by clarifying the consequences in any case of bail violations, and the fact that the same is on the run, has constituted circumstances for his arrest warrants to be issued and the payment of bail is received.

Towards the foundation's recent decision, the complaint has prompted Osman's protector, lawyer Besnik Berisha, due to the essential violation of the Penal Procedure Code, with proposals for the act of execution to be annulled and the bail measure remained in force.

The Appeals Prosecutor, on the other hand, had proposed that the lawyer Berisha's complaint be denied.

However, the Court of Appeals through the third decision made on August 26, 2024 by the college of judges: Becir Kaluldra-chairman Hashim Colak and Abdullah Ahmeti-members found that the lawyer Berisha's complaint is based, with the argument that the device of the complaining act is unclear and contrary to other subject documents, as well as unecutable. The appeal estimates that the recommendations given on the foundation's preliminary decision were not taken on the basis of this trial.

Similarly, according to Apel, Osman has been missing in a session and that by lawyer Berisha it is understood that the same is found abroad for medical treatment. For this, the defender is said to have then added some material evidence, resulting in the defendant's medical treatment.

On the other hand, Apel estimates that to this decision has come after the foundation on two occasions when the matter was restored to restoration did not adhere to Apel's recommendations.

Also, Apeli estimates that the first degree has not given clear reason in the case of attorney Berisha's claims and that it has initially revoted the bail arrangement and at the same time issued arrest warrants and appointed detention and confiscated bail. On the same day, he canceled his arrest warrant.

However, we remember that the Foundation had not only issued arrest warrants and had revoted Osman the bail.

The appeal had also been validated in the second decision, but in the latter, that the Foundation in its second and third decision had, among other things, appointed detention.

The foundation had clarified that on the occasion of the return of the case to the restoration for the first time by Appeals, they have revoted the decision to appoint detention and the arrest warrant for the implementation of the detention all under its recommendations.

As for issuing local letter to Osman, Apel says it is contrary to the arrest warrant cancelled a month ago, giving no clear reason why it was cancelled. It says that the actual situation has not changed in relation to the accused.

Apel has also explained that until their final decision, no session has been held, what would be true if Osman responded to the court's invitations. Also, no reason has been given concerning the defence promise of the accused's presence at the next session.

However, the foundation for this situation in the final decision had clarified that Osman has already proved that he is not responding to the court's invitations.

Initially, for the July 1st session, they have submitted an invitation to the session, but the response from Posta has been returned that they have not been able to hand over the invitation to the hearings, for which the Founding Station in Gracanica assigned to hand over the invitation to the session, but from the station the answer was that Osman is on the run.

Otherwise, the Constitutional Court in Pristina had initially revoted bail and assigned the 30-day detention measure to Osman after missing at the July 1st 2024 session.

However, Apeli had turned the matter into restoration, with the argument that the complaint act is involved in essential violations of the provisions of Article 384, par.1 of the KPPRK, because the first instance by deciding on the extent of the detention of Osman, has not acted in harmony with the legal provisions in force, and has not respected the initial procedures for appointing detention in such cases. According to Appeal, they have not been analyzed directly and in detail by the accused's health reports.

The “Justice Vow” on July 23rd 2024 reported how Appeals had turned the matter into foundation restoration with the reasoning that no health records, which the Foundation has denied to have been on the subject records.

While in restoration, the Foundation had revoted bail on Curri and issued arrest warrants.

Later, the Court of Appeals restored the Constitutional Court's decision to Pristina, through which it had revoted bail on Curri in the amount of 50,000 euros and issued the same warrant.

Back in the restoration, the Foundation on August 15th 2024 has decided that accused Ismet Osmani, known as “Curri”, removes the bail measure, while the amount of 50 thousand euros offered in the name of bail, will be switched to the fund for compensation of the victims, since according to the same tribunal is impossible for the institutions of justice.

The Act against Ismet Osmani, known as “Curri”, Sami Nica, Ilir Boykaut, Mentor Maqani and Adil Thaqi, was founded on November 19, 2021.

The five accused, at the session held on July 15, 2022, were declared innocent of criminal acts that weigh them down.

On November 23rd, 2022, the Constitutional Court in Pristina had ruled out requirements for dropping the indictment and rejecting evidence submitted by defenders, Kosovo lawyers Kelmendi, Besnik Berisha, Naser Soopjani and Artan Kerkeyni.

The Court of Appeals, on the other hand, had confirmed the establishment of the foundation by which the requirements for impeachment and opposition to evidence had been refused.

By contrast, Osmani is being charged by the Constitutional Prosecutor in Pristina for the criminal act of impeachment and obligation alongside Sami Nika, Ilir Boyka, Mentor Maqan. And Adil Thaci is charged with criminal work “Fraud”. You can read the full indictment by clicking on this link.

Osman in another case is suspected of attempted murder in the town of Gracanica, in which allegedly his son Armir Osmani, Mentor Beqiri and Behar Halili are also in the case. For this, another warrant has been issued.