Tag: Kosovo

More than 1400 sentenced individuals with prison or fee after the war will not suffer their sentence because the subjects have been statutory limited in the former Municipality Court of Prishtina, from January 2000 until June 2011. Also, the sentenced individuals who were transported with court vehicles, according to the report, did not reach the courts in the country’s correctional centers. The report also shows that 1,200 subjects disappeared completely because the court has not given access to the investigative unit team.

An audit from the Kosovo Judicial Council, which “Justice in Kosovo” has obtained, raises doubts about the 1,400 sentenced individuals who escaped the punishment, and also 230 prisoners have gained freedom under illegal circimstances.

The postponement of a judicial issue, known as the “Death of a case,” happens when the court fails to send the convict to serve the sentence for a particular amount of time. The statutory limitation schedules vary depending on the penal act.

The investigation of KJC lasted two years. It was found out that the Municipality Court of Prishtina has let many cases go exceed the statutory limitation.

According to the report, one of the reasons for statutory limitation of the cases is the fact that they were kept in the judges’ offices and were not sent to the execution office. Another reason is that the sentences were not transformed from to a prison sentence when the convicted person refused to pay the fee.  

Head of KJC, Enver Peci, admits that in particular cases the courts did not stop statutory limitations. Those who are predominantly responsible for the execution of cases are the chief judges, according to Peci.

Former Secretary of the Municipality Court of Prishtina, Makifete Saliuka, who managed this institution for six months, says that she decided to stop statutory limitations which transformed fee sentences to prison sentences.

The report also shows that 238 individuals were sent to the correction centers and have no evidence that they were accepted. Suspicions were raised on whether these individuals were released while being transferred; meanwhile the court considers that they have been sent to prison.

Head of Basic Court of Prishtina, Hamdi Ibrahimi, banned court drivers to drive the sentenced individuals to prison. “Now, the sentenced individuals are sent to prison by the Police of Kosovo or by the Correcting Service,” said Hamdi Ibrahimi.

“We are going to start investigating everything that was found in this report,” said Zef Prendrecaj, Head of Disciplinary Unit of Kosovo Judicial Council. These findings have pushed authorities to suspect that these irregularities occur in other courts too.

According to Peci, audits will be done in the other 13 courts.

The first prosecutor, Cezary Michalczuk, is from Poland and worked there as a prosecutor for fifteen years. He claims that his primary reasons for coming to Kosovo are his idealism and his desire to share his knowledge for the greater good.

When asked why he decided to come to Kosovo and leave his decent job in Poland he added, “I could give you my personal reasons. When I was in Poland, I was a specialist in certain areas of criminal law, and since many of my colleagues did not know about the European criminal law, I believe that it is my duty to transmit my knowledge.”

The second prosecutor, Nita Amin, worked in UK for twenty eight years. She has a background as a prosecutor since she had dealt with various crimes in the United Kingdom.

“In Kosovo, the types of crime I deal with are similar to criminal acts in the UK: Murders, aggravated murderers, unlawful possession of weapons, human trafficking etc,” added Amin when asked about the types of crimes that are under her department.

The third prosecutor, Philip Drake, was a defense counselor, deputy judge and a public prosecutor for eighteen years. His main reason for coming to Kosovo is because of the so-called “seconded,” which is a temporarily transfer from his own country.

In regards to the collection of evidence surrounding the attacks that happened back in 2008 on March 14-17, Amin explained: “Well, as you know, the events took place on March 14-17, 2008; therefore, the investigation was conducted by the former UNMIK police officers and they launched a Task Force investigation and all the evidence was collected by UNMIK.”

“Justice in Kosovo” implied that there were a lot of records where more than six attackers were identified, and Amin adds that one of her tasks is to find more suspects since the investigations are still open.

The Task Force was created by UNMIK, and since the attacks against KFOR soldiers happened in Mitrovica from in March of 2008, its mission is to investigate, arrest and prosecute serious crime.

An international officer was killed during this crime event in Mitrovica, where according to Amin that issue is still open and the murderer has not been found yet.

“Justice in Kosovo” emphasized that there were 10 Kosovars killed in 2000 in Mitrovica and asked whether there are any investigations regarding the event, Amin answered: “I am aware of the incident. As for the investigation I cannot answer because that’s not one of the cases that it is in within my office, and since it happened during the UNMIK times, I am not sure whether they handed the investigation to EULEX or not.”

As for the murder case of Selver Haradinaj, Amin explains: “That investigation is still open..It is a joint investigation between EULEX, the local prosecution office, the local police and the police of EULEX. The investigation continues.”

The task Force primarily deals with the incidents that happened towards the KFOR soldiers and there are six suspects. Regarding the incidents that happened in 2000 and 2004, the cases are not under their department and have not been solved yet.

EULEX Prosecutor Cezary Michalczuk, when asked about the start and proceedings of investigations of Krusha e Vogel, said: “We have officially launched investigations in late May of last year; exactly on May31, 2012. At least, the number of suspects reaches the number of 56, for now.” He also said EULEX is cooperating with Serbia and ICTY in The Hague.

Michalczuk is optimistic about finding evidence, even though 14 years have passed since the massacre. “Once completed the process of gathering evidence, we will, first, talk to the perpetrators individually … and then make the arrest at a proper time, if we collect enough evidence,” said Michalczuk.

According to Michalczuk, UNMIK has not investigated this massacre. However, Oliver Salgado, a spokesperson for the UN mission in Kosovo, UNMIK, said in a letter to “Justice in Kosovo,” UNMIK did produce some investigative findings and send them to ICTY in The Hague.

Eduard Gold, head of unit for war crimes in EULEX, said that investigations started in 2008 – by EULEX.

“The case of Krusha e Vogel actually began when EULEX received a mandate in 2008. The difficulties we had in this case were, of course, the period of transition from UNMIK to EULEX, for a while,” said Gold.

When asked about how long that these investigations could take, Gold said: “There is a lot of information about the suspects, even from witnesses. The time needed to check all this information is too long. Once we see that there is sufficient evidence to proceed further, of course, we will continue the investigation. I will not give timeline, but of course we do not want to take too much time.”

There is a huge disappointment amongst people in Krusha e Vogel. One of the survivors said that the investigations are done unprofessionally and feelssceptical about whether the perpetrators will pay for their crimes. “In two days Krusha e Vogel lost 102 people. The first Day on March 25, they were nine people lost, while the second day another 102 people were missing,” says Agron Limani, director of the association “March 26, 1999.”

 

Among the questions discussed were: Why has the appointment of Enver Peci as a Head of KJC been contested? Why did Sali Mekaj make false accusations about irregularities in the election process? Why were his claims rejected by members of the KJC? How many votes did Peci get? Will Peci resign if he does not fulfill his election promises?

Recognized as one of the most important events for Kosovo’s judiciary, the KJC elections saw Enver Peci re-elected as the Head of the institution.

Problems emerged when one of the members of the council – respectively the Head of the Appeal Court, Sali Mekaj voiced problems about the process.

Mekaj said his rights as a candidate were denied. He outlined his grievances in a letter to KJC members.

“The irregularities make the process non-transparent, irregular and unlawful. In my case, it resulted in the violation of my right to be a candidate for the Head of KJC and to participate equally in this competition,” Mekaj wrote.

In addition, two candidates, Valdete Daka and Enver Peci, presented their platforms for justice reforms. Peci won, getting six voters more than Daka. After Peci get a new mandate for the next three years, he vowed that if he does not succeed in implementing his platform, he will resign.

Also, “Justice in Kosovo” broadcast a report about a trial at the Economic Court in Prishtina. The trial concerned a libel lawsuit by businessman Bejtush Zhugolli against Zeri newspaper for an article titled “Godfathers of tenders in Kosovo” written by journalist Arbana Xharra. The lawsuit was filed last year.

After three court hearings, the judge in Economic Court in Prishtina, Fetije Sadiku announced the verdict, rejecting the lawsuit, arguing that the article that the Xharra wrote was based on official documents.

With this verdict, “Justice in Kosovo” asked Sadiku for a statement, but she refused to speak in front the camera – reasoning that the case is still in process at a higher court.

In its decision, the court reasoned that the respondent, Arbana Xharra only quoted her sources of information and did not use her opinion. Xharra had, in fact, revealed the sources of her information and adhered to the code of ethics of print media in Kosovo.

Finally the judgment of the court said that the plaintiff, Zhugolli, did not give sufficient reasons to the court that publication of his name has influenced the damage of his prestige and reputation. Furthermore, he did not offer sufficient evidence to support his suit, either.

Also during the program, BIRN aired a report that showed how KJC deals with cases in which a judge violates the rules. It showed that within KJC there exists a Disciplinary Commission that takes disciplinary action against those judges who do not respect the ethics code.

If Kosovo citizens have any dissatisfaction with any judge, they can complain to the Office of Disciplinary Council or to the Disciplinary Committee. The most frequent cases involve negligence and misconduct. Sanctions can include a warning, final warning, written warning and dismissal, said the “Justice in Kosovo” report.

The third report talked about a case in which the prosecution and court investigated and convinced two policemen in the region of Mitrovica. They were convinced of misuse of official position and bribery. The judgment was made possible by a cooperative witness.  

The case utilized covert monitoring of conversations, which the court authorized.  

One of the policemen was sentenced to five months imprisonment while the other was sentenced to 14 months.

Among the questions discussed were: Who are the potential candidates for this position? When is the election process going to be held? What are Valdete Daka’s plans if she runs this institution? What does Enver Peci says? How is the election process going to be organized and who has the right to vote? Why do the lawyers think that the judges decided without reviewing the case files? What does the judge say about the accusations? Why does Kosovo have the highest number of detentions?

In the election there were two candidates, Valdete Daka and Enver Peci.

Kosovo Judicial Council is the highest justice body, which decides for the election and suspension of judges, and organizes other justice bodies.

Both of the candidates have plans for the future if they are elected. Daka believes that based on her three years of experience as KJC member, she has the ability to run the council. According to Daka, KJC should increase the transparency with the public and it should also balance the powers between the branches: “There should be a balance between judiciary and other branches. Our branch was always left aside despite the fact that we are equal to other branches. The judiciary should hire more judges and a professional staff in order to lower the number of cases.” Daka promised that if she is elected as the Head of the Council, she will raise the funds for a professional staff.

Meanwhile, the other candidate, Peci claims that he is running for the Head of the Council not by its own will, but because the other members of the council chose him and thought that he is the right person for that position for three upcoming years. In addition, Peci admits that there have been some failures of KJC, but they were inherited from the past: “As we may know, in the beginning we had problems in dividing competencies and then we had the process of verification where we verified all the judges and as a result the number of cases.” In the future mandate, he plans to lower the number of cases.

According to Peci, KJC does not have funds to engage professional co-workers because the budget that we requested was not approved by the Ministry of Finances and the Parliamentary Commission. KJC has a lot of work to do in order to change the perception about the judiciary in Kosovo.

Both candidates, Daka and Peci, do not have any plan on how to solve the issue of the courts in Northern Kosovo because they say that politics should resolve this issue.

 

Among the questions discussed were: Which of the judges of Constitutional Court were against returning the case on trial? Why are members of the Kosovo Judicial Council dissatisfied with the decision of Constitutional Court for Xhemajli’s case? Has this judicial case created a dangerous precedent? Who says that the Constitutional Court is transformed into a fourth instance court?

The decision to return to Bajrush Xhemajli’s case is involving the Constitutional Court and the Kosovo Judicial Council. Supreme Judge, Valdete Daka said: “The Supreme Court is the final court and the Supreme Court decisions are final, but as we can see the Constitutional Court is taking the role of the fourth instance.”

Four years ago, in the Prishtina-Ferizaj highway, Bajrush Xhemajli, former Mayor of Ferizaj was accused of causing a fatal car accident where Labinot Rrustemi was found dead. The accident was investigated by District Prosecution in Prishtina. Expert Ylli Koshi concluded that Xhemajli’s car caused the accident because he was speeding. Xhemajli, who was also injured during the accident, decided to defend himself in silence. The court ruled that Xhemajli was found guilty, and he was sentenced to two years and six months in prison. Xhemajli and his defendant were dissatisfied with this decision and they asked to involve a freelance expert, but the District Court denied their request.

Xhemajli also resigned from his position as mayor because according to the law of local self-governance, sentenced individuals cannot govern the municipality.

In addition, Xhemajli was sentenced from the highest court, but he did not suffer the punishment. Xhemajli made a third appeal in the Constitutional Court and they accepted his appeal. His trial was suspended because the constitutional law claimed that there were not enough experts to investigate the case.

The victim’s father however was dissatisfied with the court’s decision: “I was left speechless when I saw in the newspaper that the constitutional court freed the Mayor of Ferizaj, with the possibility of retrial in the Supreme Court,” said Rustemi.

The compiler of the appeal in the Constitutional Court, lawyer Korab Sejdiu explained that Xhemajli appealed to the Constitutional Court not to contest the expertise, but to request for the right to engage in an expert in order for the parties to be equal.  These denials have led the Constitutional Court and Xhemajli to review the case.

 

Among questions discussed were: Why are the lawyers threatening to strike? Why did the Kosovo Prosecutorial Council stop paying lawyers? How many lawyers were faced with disciplinary procedures this year? Why didn’t the Kosovo Chamber of Advocates publish the names of the lawyers who were punished for not doing their job? Why were the lawyers punished with a fee of 300 Euros? Will they lose their licenses?

The interrogation of suspected persons is in risk to be blocked if there is modality found to pay the lawyers who are engaged in interviewing the suspected persons. This threat comes from the lawyers who are working with the police to represent people who do not have the financial resources. According to the Penal Code of Kosovo, when a person does not have financial resources to pay the lawyer, the prosecution bodies engage in a lawyer who is paid by the public found. The payment of lawyers was done by the prosecutorial fund, but prosecution stopped payments 6 months ago and said that the Police of Kosovo should pay lawyers.

Driton Govori, lawyer, says: “After my commitment to the police station, I went to the District Prosecution in Prishtina to ask for the payment, but they told me that from now on the Police of Kosovo will pay the lawyers.”

According to Osman Havolli, Head of Regional Branch of Advocates in Prishtina, “the lawyers who represent their clients in police station are not being paid. The Police of Kosovo says that the lawyers should be paid by the State Prosecution.”

Shkelzen Maliqi, Secretary of the Kosovo Prosecutorial Council, says: “We have stopped payments for cases where lawyers are engaged without the prosecutor’s permission. Also a part of the payment should be done by the police of Kosovo.” In contrast, a spokesperson for the Police of Kosovo, Baki Kelani, says: “The payment of the lawyers ‘ex officio’ is an issue that belongs to the State Prosecution.” In addition, Baki Kelani did not give any information regarding the case where the lawyers are called without the prosecution’s permission.

According to Ibrahim Dobruna,“If the State Prosecution and the Police of Kosovo do not find a solution, the lawyers will hold a warning strike to warn the institutions.”

Many lawyers have been punished with a fee of 300 Euros because they were not attending the training sessions organized by the Kosovo Chamber of Advocates. 80 lawyers have been punished and if they do not meet the criteria, they will lose their license. The Chamber of Advocates does not give the punished lawyers’ names because of current regulations.

Abdullah Limani, of the Kosovo Public Procurement Regulatory Body, said that this procedure was against the law for tenders. “What happened to tender for the supply of food items in Prizren is against any procurement standard,” Limani said. “Supplies, works or services must not be performed once, and then the procedure.”

Fatmir Kastrati, of AAK, said he used his 100 Euros to buy goods at Ben-af. “The decision of assembly was lawful, but then the procurement law was violated and this is not the problem of municipal councillors,” Kastrati said.

The LDK’s press office Prizren reacted with a statement, according to which, without even meeting the legal terms of procurement, the municipality prejudiced the tender winner; therefore, eliminating real competition and violating the law.

Abdullah Thaci, LDK spokesperson, said “the municipality identified the winners themselves and just then formally announced tenders.”

NaimCahan, an official of the organization KDI, said that, based on the calculation of this organization, the sum of 43 600 Euros would have been sufficient to give 80 Euros to 45 families with social cases per month and annually.

Legal Officer of Ben-af, Besnik Kuqi, claimed that the firm had fulfilled “all the conditions required for the competition” and that it had won the tender.

Acting chief of the procurement office in Prizren, Alban Susuri, said that the contract has not been signed because the municipality has no money for it.

However, the municipal spokesman Ymer Berisha said the decision was taken in accordance with the municipal assembly procedures.

“Some officials, including the mayor, have not used the funds,” said Berisha. “I would like to confirm the citizens that we are within the normal practices of decision-making.”

Among questions discussed were: Why was Shkelzen Pruthi excluded from his inheritance? How could his siblings exclude him from the legacy in a process that was held in Municipality Court of Prishtina, in Graqanica’s branch? How could three members of the family give a false declaration? What kind of offense did they commit in this case? Why was the Judicial Council unaware of the article 135 of the law of non-disputable procedure?

Shkelzen Pruthi, currently living in the U.S., was excluded from his inheritance in 2010 because of his siblings’ false declarations. Shkelzen, from Prishtina, is the eldest son of Faik Pruthi who was originally from Gjakova. Faik Pruthi died in 1981. In addition, Shkelzen Pruthi was not included in the transaction when his siblings sold their father’s house, located in Sunny Hill, Prishtina, for 250,000 Euros. The son of Shkelzen Maliqi, Edmond Maliqi raised penal charges against his uncles and aunt for excluding him from his inheritance.

Moreover, BIRN’s research shows that there were many irregularities that resulted in excluding Shkelzen Pruthi from his inheritance. Edmond Pruthi says: “The inherited house was sold from my uncles and aunt and they excluded me from the inheritance.” The judge reviewing this case, Nenad Laziq, was not aware that Faik Pruthi had four inheritors. According to Laziq, based on the article 135 of the law of undisputed procedure, the court has drafted the death act based on the declaration of the three inheritors. “Before they declared that they are the only inheritors, I warned them that if they do not tell the truth, they will be accused of breaching the law” says Laziq.

Enver Peci, Head of the Kosovo Judicial Council, says that he was unaware of this legal possibility and he promises that the Council will ask for a legal stance, which requires the death act to be released by the registrar officials, thus this procedure will avoid any irregularities regarding inheritance.

Even though Blerim Pruthi, Fitore Pruthi and Gazmend Pruthi have sold the house to a third party, Shkelqen Pruthi has already started the procedure of cancelling the transaction contract. He believes that his father’s inheritance will be returned to his family and will be divided equally. This procedure was started in the Basic Court of Prishtina and is being reviewed by Judge Zenel Leku.

Among the questions discussed were: Why did Zejnepe Buzhala claim that police officer Fadil Shishani occupied her apartment? How is it possible that after twelve years the Buzhala family came back to the apartment that Fadil Shishani occupied? Why did the court support this family to return to this apartment and why is the judge on this case intimidated by Shishani? How was the police officer accused? What does Fadil Shishani say about this accusation?  

Judge Skender Zariqi claims that he felt threatened the day Shishani was removed from the apartment. The situation began in 1999 when Shishani occupied the apartment where Buzhala once lived. Buzhala claimed that she was required to leave the apartment during the war. The apartment was given to her for an indefinite amount of time and she has all the proper documentation, which was released by the Center for Preschool Education.

“When we came back from England, in 2001, it was impossible to settle in our apartment because there we found Shishani’s family”, said Buzhala. She made an agreement with Shishani to let them stay in her apartment because they did not have anywhere to go, and they signed a contract. Shishani does that they occupied Buzhala’s apartment because they had no place to stay after the war. According to him, they did not know who the owner of the apartment was and he also confirmed that he signed a contract. Two years later Mr. Shishani went to the municipality to ask for the apartment and found out that the apartment does not belong to Buzhala.

To resolve this issue Buzhala was addressed to the court. The court decided that Shishani family should leave the apartment because their evidence was not taken into consideration. The decision was going to be implemented on September 3, 2012, but the implementation was impossible because Shishani threatened the parties in the court. “Shishani said on the day that the decision was implemented, the Buzhala family and Ibrahim Dobruna, the lawyer of the family, will suffer the consequences,” said Buzhala.  The intimidation was taken into consideration especially since Shishani is a police officer.

In addition, Shishani was charged for intimidating the Kosovo Police Inspectorate. On the other hand, Shishani denies that he intimidated the judge or the parties of the court.

The decision was implemented on September 12, 2012, and the Buzhala family returned to the apartment for only five days. After five days, the apartment was taken from the municipality of Drenas claiming that the apartment belongs to the municipality.