Appeals retrial the corrective official's case for bribery

The Court of Appeals has ruled by which it has retriald the case against Mentor Avdyllaj, whom the Constitutional Court in Pristina had sentenced to two years in prison and a thousand euros in fines for accepting bribes.

In this case, Avdylaj in the quality of a correctional Service officer in the Dubrava Prison is accused of receiving 2 thousand euros in bribes with the aim of early release of a person from prison, who was in pain of punishment, reports the “Justice Bettim”.

“With the approval of the defendant's defense complaint Mentor Avdylaj, Kosovo lawyer Kelmendi, the Constitutional Court's Court Act in Pristina -- quite frankly, the Writing PKR Department of Crime.nr.330718, dated 18.04.2024, so that the court's criminal case turns into the first instance in the retrial and re-restate”, the Apel decision is said.

In Apel's decision to take place on January 16th 2025, it is said that against the foundation decision, the defender of Avdylaj, Kosovo lawyer Kelmendi had filed a plea due to the essential violations of criminal procedure provisions, fallible and incomplete confirmation of the actual situation and violation of the Criminal Law.

She had proposed that her defender be acquitted of the prosecution or the subject be turned into retrial.

On the other hand, the Appeals Prosecution had demanded that the defense complaint be refused unconventionally and the Constitutional Act be confirmed.

According to Apel's findings, the first degree ruling has essential violations of the penal procedure's provisions, and the complaining bias should be annulled because the Foundation has failed to state clearly and completely convincing reasons for the defendant's sentence.

The appeal finds that no causes and reasons for each point of judgment have been presented in a clear and complete way as to what reason they are tested or untested by not giving recognition to evidence, while those given are not in full compliance with the evidence and paperwork of the subject.

According to Appeal, it is not only enough to fill the element of the quality of the perpetrators but to reason on relevant facts that make up the elements of the criminal work.

“ ... due to the concrete case, the Court has argued the quality of the accused that he was a correct officer in the Office for Release of Conditions at the Dubrava Core Service Centre, while giving no reason for relevant facts, of non-action respectively in accordance with his official duty, consisting at the limits of formal duty authorisation”, the decision said.

The first rate, according to Appeal, has not described the facts and circumstances that constitute criminal activity.

Also, according to Apel's decision, the first - degree act of judgment is contrary to the fact that the act of judgment is largely based on conflicting and unclear statements.

The Appeals College estimated that the act of first degree was involved in essential violations of the penal procedure provisions, which have contributed to the wrong and unfair confirmation of the actual situation, and that both of these violations have contributed to the violation of the Penal Law, since without the elimination of offenses in question cannot be a confirmation of the actual situation or the proper application of the Criminal Law, for which the judicial act of unstable law do.

The second degree recommends to the Foundation that in the retrial it eliminates essential violations of the penal procedure provisions, proceed once again with all evidence, and make their assessment, and in the course of other important evidence for correcting the actual situation.

“... according to its assessment, the court will also ask for the file on bail from the S.H.A.'s Office for Release of Conditions to QK in Dubrava, to give reasons for decision facts and depending on the result of the assessment of evidence to assess that the elements of the peius<1 deed are consumed or any other criminal work, to draw correct and legitimate conclusions that prove to be factual, all in proportion to the principle of reform in peius<1>, it is said in the verdict.

Otherwise, on March 18th, 2024, the Constitutional Court in Pristina has received a criminal act with which it has convicted accused Mentor Avdylaj to two years in prison and a thousand euros in fines.

Otherwise, for help in committing the crime of bribery, Astrit Lajqi, who is now in the quality of a cooperative witness, was also charged.

The Constitutional Prosecutor in Pristina, on December 12th 2018, has filed an indictment against Mentor Avdyllaj for criminal work “Taking bribes” and Astrit Lajqi for help in carrying out the criminal offense to bribe.

According to the indictment, Avdylaj on March 12th 2018, in the quality of a Corresponsive Service officer at the parole office at the Dubrava Core Service Centre, deliberately and illegally, with the aim of taking bribes through accused Lajqi, from the B.H.

In the indictment, Avdylaj 2 thousand euros of bribery was reportedly accepted by Lajqi at the gas station “Shala Petrol”, at the entrance of Peja, with the goal of releasing the early Hoti from prison, who was in pain of detention at the Dubrava Correct Center.

The accused Lajqi, however, reportedly received 2 thousand euros in bribes from B.H., in the presence of the S.Q. witness and had sent them to Avdyrays./Periscopi/