Death of two employees in Gjakova, prosecution seeks detention for two suspects

They are suspected of not installing protective equipment in the quality of investor and employee and not providing their use when necessary.

“According to the point I of the prosecution's application device, among other things it's suggested that there is a suspicion that the defendant J.P., a responsible person of the legal person, NTSH “Sh....” Sh.P., on the day 21.07.2025 about 08:16min, in Gjakova, on the “NT U.S.... ” in quality of employer investor who is responsible for workplace security and health, does not install protective equipment, does not ensure their use when necessary, and by failing to comply with technical regulations on measures for workplace security causes the deaths of workers here of H.J. and D.B., in the way that by acting in opposition to Article 5 p.1, Article 6 p.g.1 and Article 7 par.1 of Law No. 04/ L-161 for safety and working health does not apply preventing risk measures because the victims while working on building the residential facility had, respectively, been in the violator of the board mounted out of technical conditions by doing the decoupling of outside concrete boards for a moment, and the same fall from the third floor, to the height of the nine-meter ground level, which during the work had no vest and helmets and had not established the rope for safety, as well as the place from which the victims had not dropped the plankkk and rail that would not allow workers to land to fall, as a result of the removal and injuries in the country, and had not taken to lose their own lives in the 21st hospital. ”

These actions form the suspicion that the defendant J.P. has committed criminal work, extermination, damage or removal of protective equipment, and risking security at work by Article 358 par.7 related to par.3 and par.2 of KPRC.”

“NTSH “Sh... ” in quality of employee who is responsible for safety and health at the workplace, does not install protective equipment, does not ensure their use when necessary, and by failing to comply with technical regulations on security measures at the workplace by carelessness causes the deaths of workers here of H.J. and D.B., in the way that by acting in opposition to Article 5 prg.1, below 6 prg and 71. of Law No. 04/ L-161 for safety and working health does not apply the precautions to avoid risks because the victims while working on building the residential facility had respectively been in the violator of the board mounted out of technical conditions by doing the decoupling of outside concrete boards for a moment, and the same fall from the third floor up to the nine-foot ground (9) which during the work had no vested vest and helmets and had not established the rope for safety as well as the site where the victims had not fallen from which they had not been set up, nor a paramac that would allow workers to land to fall, as a result of the crash in the country and injuries and were taken to lose their two medical lifelines in the 21st hospital. With these actions, suspicion forms that the defendant A.M. has committed criminal acts, extermination, damage or removal of protective equipment, and risking security at work by Article 358 par.7 related to par.3 and par.2 of KPRK.”