Appeal eases the sentence from 2 to 1 year imprisonment to Dejan Pantiqi for attacking KKZ offices, proves the rest of the decision

However, the rest of the Constitutional Court Act in Pristina confirmed that Milun Milenkovic and Aleksandar Vlasic were sentenced to 5 years in prison, while Miomir Vakiq was acquitted.

Otherwise, the Constitutional Court in Pristina on July 28th 2025 has declared a condemnation of Dejan Pantic, Milun Milenkovic and Aleksandar Vlajq. Pantic was sentenced to 2 years in prison, Milenkovic and Vlajjic were sentenced to 5 years in prison, while Miomir Vakiq was acquitted of prosecution, reports “Justice Vocit “, broadcast Periscope.

We remember that Vlajjic on June 5, 2026 by the Constitutional Court in Pristina has also been convicted of spying criminal acts, serving five years in prison after acknowledging he was BIA agent.

Regarding the terrorist attack on KKZ offices, Apeli had held hearings to hear the parties' complaints on April 28th 2026.

The second degree ruling appears to be taken by the court with this composition: Ferit Osmani -- head of college, Albina Shabani-Rama and Avni Mehmeti-members.

Appeals' findings in relation to accused Milun Milenkovic:

According to Apel's decision, in relation to Milenkovic's defender's complaint, the Court has found that it is not required to expressly emphasize the form of guilt, but only to contain clear descriptions of criminal acts and all facts and circumstances.

And since, in the concrete case, the form of guilt according to Appeals, is not determined formally by the use of terms “direct love” or “evental wish”, but is derived from the actual description of the accused's actions, the way of their realisation, his conduct before, and after carrying out the work, as well as the entire of the evidence administered during the trial.

According to Appeal, the evidence administered during the first-instanced judicial process does not stand separate from each other, but create an unbroken proving chain.

Thus, according to Apel, their interconnection results in that accused Milun Milenkovic was present at all crucial moments of development of the event: at the group's gathering stage, at the moment of the crossing near the emergency vehicle and then during the co-ordinated move towards the attack.

The appeal in the ruling has stressed how the Court fully recognises them as right and based the findings of the Foundation, has proved beyond reasonable doubt that accused Milenkovic was not only present at the scene, but has actively participated in the realisation of the organised attack on the offices of the Election Commission in North Mitrovica.

On the other hand, Apel has found the claim that the guilt of accused Milenkovic is not based on any material or personal evidence, since based on the test of the same matter, it creates a logical and constant provatory chain that leads to the conclusion that accused Milun Milenkovic has participated in carrying out the terrorist work.

Appeals' findings in relation to accused Alessandra Vlajjic:

According to Appeals, the first instance court has convincingly confirmed the presence of indictee Vladjic on the scene on December 6th 2022 in co-ordination with the accused in this criminal case, Milenkovic and other fugitives on the run.

Furthermore, it is said that the first instance court has built a stable, clear, and mutually-based reality situation that meets each other and excludes any reasonable suspicion of invisibility or the chance of the presence of accused Vlasic.

The decision reportedly shows that Aleksandar Vlajq was present at the scene, observed, photographed, communicated by phone at the crucial moment of the police's arrival and election officials, as well as helped further mobilise the crowd.

Thus, according to Apelit, the actual situation has been correctly, completely reliable, while defence claims do not bring down the conclusion reached by the court of the first instance either in fact or in that logic and law.

Appeals' findings in relation to the accused, Dejan Pantic:

In the decision, Appeals has stressed that he has found in part the Pantic complaint based only on the height of the sentence.

Initially, according to the verdict, regarding the Pantiqi's guilty claim, the first-degree court has confirmed the actual situation regarding the accused, making a comprehensive analysis of personal evidence and managed materials during the trial.

Furthermore, it is said that the first instance has legitimately rescinded the criminal act, blaming it for “The participation in the crowd that committed criminal acts and hooliganism”.

According to Appeal, in the case of measuring the sentence, the first degree has not taken into account the personal circumstances of the Pantic accused, his behaviour during the procedure, lack of prior criminal sentences and low levels of his social risk.

Therefore, according to Apel in this direction, the 1 year sentence has been adequate and reflects the degree of criminal responsibility of the accused, the extenuating circumstances of the case and the objectives of the legally defined sentence.

Apel's findings in relation to P complaint SRK's:

The ruling says that the Special Prosecutor's claims do not stand because the first-degree court has made fair and thorough assessment of the evidence administered in this criminal case, has reached accurate actual conclusions, and has provided sufficient, clear and legal reasoning for each accused separately.

Furthermore, according to Appeals it has been estimated that the first degree court has acted within the limits of its legal disrepute in individualising criminal sanctions, taking into account difficult and extenuating circumstances, the degree of criminal responsibility, the nature of the work and its consequences.

According to Appeal, the pronounced sentences are not presented as illegal or arbitrary and that there is no violation of the principle of proportionality.

Also, Appeals finds him imbued with the Prosecutor's claim to the Pantyq, stressing in the decision that the first instance has justly isolated his participation in the crowd from direct participation in the terrorist attack, arguing that for the work described in the indictment, there has not been proved beyond reasonable suspicion its concrete connection with the launch of explosive devices or the realisation of the terrorist act.

Apel's findings in relation to the accused, Miomir Vakiq:

According to Appeal, even complaints concerning accused Miomir Vakiq do not stand. The appeal finds that the Foundation has given clear reasons why it has come to its finale, consisting of the lack of sufficient evidence that will directly and safely link this accused to incriminating actions.

At the initial session, held on January 30th 2024, accused Dejan Pantic, Milun Milenkoviq, Aleksandar Vlajq and Miomir Vakiq have been declared innocent over the charge they are being charged with.

Otherwise, according to the charge act, Pantic, Milenkovic, Vlajiq and Vakiq on December 6th 2022, at 14:39, had carried out the terrorist attack on KKZ offices, throwing hand grenades and bomb shocks.

On December 13, 2023 The SPRK had announced the establishment of the indictment for Pantic and the other three.

On December 12th, 2022, the Constitutional Court in Pristina appointed a month of detention against former Serbian police officer Dejan Pantic, while on December 28, 2022, the Constitutional Court in Pristina replaced the house arrest measure.

Pantic had been arrested on December 10th 2022 at the Jarinje border crossing, while his arrest had prompted reactions from the Serbian side, which followed the settlement of barricades at border points. /Periscope