Even Appeal confirms the indictment of corruption against Mujka and Hysen Muzliukaj of VV)

According to the indictment, Mujka in the quality of Mitrovica municipality deputy chairman, while Muzliukaj in the quality of the director for Geodezi, Kadast and Property in that municipality are accused of misusing official office in connection with the former private estate exchange case. Meanwhile, Mujka is also accused of unreporting or false reporting of property, with the reasoning that in the quality of Iber-Lepenci's executive chief, Periscope did not declare 60 thousand of the 50 euros that were seized at home, reports “The Justice Vocation “, Periscopi broadcast.

“REFUZOUS as groundless complaints filed by defendants Faruk Mujka, lawyer Xhafer Tahiri and Hysen Muzliukaj, lawyer Ahmet Tahiri, while acting the Constitutional Court in Pristina Special Department, dated 16.12.2025, V GREOUS”, says Apel's decision.

Against the first-degree ruling for confirmation of the indictment, the defenders of the accused Mujka and Muzliukaj, lawyers Xhafer Tahiri and Ahmet Tahiri had filed complaints due to essential violations of legal provisions, as well as violations of the Penal Law provisions.

The defence had proposed to the Court of Appeals to endorse complaints as being based on complaints and to declare unacceptable evidence and to drop the indictment, as well as halt the criminal procedure against the accused.

While, the Appeals Prosecution had proposed that complaints filed by the defense and the complaining act be denied as groundless.

According to the Court of Appeals' ruling, complaints are not based, since the first-degree court has properly and correctly examined the claims presented in objections to the indictment and requests for its throw, giving clear and judicial reasons that the indictment filed by the SPRK contains sufficient evidence supporting the well-based suspicion that the accused committed the criminal acts they are charged with in the indictment.

In addition, Apel's decision reportedly does not hold to the defense's claims pertaining to the criminal acts charged by the accused, and at this stage of the same criminal procedure, the same are groundless, since all these claims will be assessed in court after the trial management, where the guilt or innocence of the accused will be proven.

According to Appeal, defence claims that the first degree court has exceeded its procedural competencies and prejudged the case, stating the existence of elements of criminal work and the responsibility of the accused do not stand.

Appeal points out that from the analysis of the whole argument of the decision, it turns out that the first degree court has not issued a final verdict on the guilt of the accused, but has made only a preliminary assessment of the ongoing evidence of well-based suspicion as a condition for continuing the criminal procedure.

At the end of the ruling, the Appeals College has reportedly found that the court's reasoning in the first degree does not constitute the prejudgment of the final outcome of the criminal procedure, as the final assessment of the evidence and the validation of guilt or innocence can only be done with the conviction of the formal form, following the administration and direct assessment of all evidence in the judicial review.

Apel's decision resulted in a 20 February 2026 from college made up of Albina Shabani-Rama as college chairman, as well as Valon Kurtaj and Vaton Durguti-members.

Otherwise, the Constitutional Court in Pristina, on December 16th 2025, had taken a ruling with which it had rejected requests for dropping the indictment and rejecting evidence concerning charges charged by the accused.

The foundation after reviewing the defenders' claims has found their demands groundless, since the indictment has been established in accordance with the law and there is sufficient evidence supporting the indictment in terms of criminal acts charged by the accused.

Also, the Foundation's decision says that there is no exemplifying of circumstances in this criminal case which excludes the criminal responsibility of the accused, failed to establish criminal prosecution, amnesty or pardon, and that sufficient evidence exists which confirms well-based suspicion.

The two accused, at the initial session on October 20, 2025, were declared innocent.

The Special Prosecutor of the Republic of Kosovo (PSRK) on September 9th 2025 has filed charges against Faruk Mujka and Hysen Muzliukaj, who are accused of misusing official office. The mujka is also charged with nonreporting or false reporting of wealth.

According to the indictment, Mujka in the quality of Mitrovica municipality deputy chairman, while Muzliukaj in the quality of the director for Geodezi, Kadast and Property in that municipality are accused of misusing official office in connection with the former private estate exchange case. Meanwhile, Mujka is also accused of not reporting or reporting false property, with the reasoning that in the quality of Iber-Lepenci's executive chief, he did not declare 60 thousand and 50 euros to be seized at home.

What about the first point of the indictment?

According to the indictment, Mujka in the quality of Mitrovica municipality deputy chairman and Hysen Muzliukaj in the quality of director for Geodezi, Kadast and Property, deliberately and exploiting official office, had exceeded their competencies in order to benefit the third persons and at the expense of public property.

Initially, Mujka is said to be acting on behalf of the South Mitrovica municipality chairman and Muzliukaj in the position of Director for Geodezi, Cadastre and Prone, presenting the Comunal Assembly proposal for exchange of real estate with location on the “Afrem Jia” in Mitrovica (centre of the former Bankos).

The indictment said that the area of incompatibility was 139 square meters from the total area of 631 square metres, which had represented as the possession of the municipality, in exchange for the total parcel of 102 square meters owned by the physical person Besarta Isufi on the “Ali Zeneli” in Mitrovica.

Always according to the indictment, Mujka and Muzliukaj had known that such property was not municipal property and that there is a court process with indictments initiated by the Kosovo Privatisation Agency (AKP) and Social Company “Yugobanka” in Mitrovica, and being aware that the Municipal Assembly of Mitrovica had twice made decisions for the declaration of the former Bankos' special interest where property was located in question, on August 30th 2012, and 23rd 2017, on whose basis was required by the AKP with regard to the property of the former Commission's transfers ownership was not owned by the Commission.

The Actakuz says the two indictees had acted at the expense of public interest and in opposition to the Law for providing in exchange for the real estate of the Communists and Orders to determine procedures for the exploitation and exchange of municipality property. And according to the charge, giving in private property is prohibited.

Thus, the two defendants are charged with causing considerable damage The APK, at the value of the modified/compensible object, was estimated to be 125 thousand and 100 euros.

So for these actions, Mujka and Muzliukaj are being tasked with criminal work “Use of official position or authority” introduced to Article 414, paragraph 2 related to paragraph 1 and related to Article 31 of the Republic of Kosovo Penal Code (KPRK).

What is accused of at the second point of the Mujka indictment?

The indictment says Faruk Mujka in quality of the chief executive of “Iber-Lepencius”, which under the current Law for Declaration, Origin and Control of Wealth and Gifts was obliged to make the statement of wealth, has not presented the required data in the declaration, as from the unproved date of July 15th to 2023, in his house had possessed a total of 60 thousand and 50 euros, this found and seized during the implementation of the Court's ordinance at his home in Mitrovica.

This amount, according to the indictment, Mujka had not submitted on the pre-year property declaration to the Agency for Prevention of Corruption, even though he was legally obligated and knew that cash sums should be presented in the declaration.

So for these actions, Mujka is being tasked with criminal work “not reporting or false reporting of property, income, gift, material benefits or financial obligations” by Article 430, paragraph 2 of the Penal Code.