Supreme Is Sentence to 17 Years in Prison of Buta's Brother

“is rejected as unfounded the request of convicts standing Januzi for the protection of legitimacy, brought against the act of decisive form of the Constitutional Court at Ferizaj ) the Ra's Crime Department, ..., on April 30th, 2017, says the Supreme Court's ruling.

The Foundation Court in Ferizaj through the judgment of April 30th 2024, Januzi, sentenced him to 17 years in prison. The verdict was confirmed by the Court of Appeals.

Against these judgments, a plea for protection of legitimacy has exercised defenders of the convict Januzi, attorney Florin Vlltopi, due to essential violations of criminal procedure provisions, violation of the Criminal Law, and other violations that have influenced the legality of judicial decisions.

The vretop had proposed that requests be approved as based, while contested judgments be changed and that the convict be found guilty of the criminal act of “Vrasing committed in a state of mental effect”, and that a milder sentence be pronounced against him, or if this court considers that in the actions of convicts remain, then a much softer or canceled sentence to be pronounced on him to return to retrial in the first court.

And the State Prosecutor, with the pre-emptive of January 27, 2025, has proposed that the request be refused as unfounded, the Justice Vow writes.

In the Supreme Court's decision, it is said that this court initially finds it necessary to point out that the defender's claims that at any moment the life of witness Maliq Latifi, and others, and that on the part of the convicts, there will not be after preparation for the execution of the late one, will not be an object of consideration.

This is because the court has not convicted the convicted criminal acts of “grave murder” by Article 173, par.1, subpar.1.5 of the Penal Code, for which it was charged, but the criminal offence of “Murder” by Article 172 of the Penal Code.

According to the Supremee, in the concrete case it has unequivocally proved that there was no objective attack, insults, or mistreatment on the part of the deceased.

This fact, according to the Supreme Court's decision, is confirmed by the video recording of the site, which results in the critical moment now the deceased was that together with witness Latifi, talking and standing in front of the store, as Januz suddenly approaches the victim with pistols, and upon approaching him, Januz takes the witness away with his left hand, then shoots him six times now to the deceased with fire.

The Supremei has stressed that the claim of protection regarding the extent of the sentence has been unclear, since the request for protection of legitimacy cannot be exercised due to the sentence ruling.

According to the indictment, on May 28, 2022, about 00:53, in Ferizaj, on the “Rejep Bislimi “, respectively, prior to the introduction of the market “Exchange Market”, the defendant standing Januzi, deliberately and preliminary preparations had deliberately and deliberately deprived of life now of the deceased G.H. and with that case had endangered the life of Maliq Lafi, who had been ahead of the market entrance as well as others inside the market.

In the indictment, it is said that after an earlier dispute over a brother's car of the now undefected man for whom the defendant has claimed to have been burned on the part of the deceased now, to meet the deceased now six times in his direction with firearms and as a result of shots from his wounds, G.H changes lives as listed in the August 22nd 2022 autopsy report, with which the cause of death had been revealed, resulting from gunshot wounds taken by firearms.

In this regard, Januzi was charged with committing criminal work “grave murder” by Article 173, paragraph 1, subparagraph 1.5 of the Penal Code.

According to the device II of this indictment, defendant Januzi was charged with having mastered the brandy “gun from indefinite until May 28th 2022, in Ferizaj, without authorization and contrary to the applicable law regarding weapons in Kosovo. SAUER model 38H”, with a clip with a capacity of 8 rounds, with which the weapon had carried out the criminal work described as in the device I of this indictment, where the same was seized.

With this, it was accused of committing criminal work “keep ownership, control or unauthorized possession of weapons” by Article 366, paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code.