FLASH
Shkruar nga Pamfleti
The lawyer of the former prime minister, Sali Berisha, Genc Gjokutaj, considered the decision of the GJKKO Appeal as the worst solution ever given by the court, which set the measure of mandatory appearance twice a month for the former prime minister Berisha.
The lawyer of the leader of the DP, said that the decision-making whether to appear or not, belongs to Sali Berisha.
"We do not make predictions, the decision is Berisha's. We do not have a clear decision. It is a senseless, strange decision. We must read the decision", declared Gjokutaj.
"The appeal of GJKKO on the appeal of the prosecution, based on a decision of the first instance for the revocation of the measure for Berisha, decided to partially replace it. He was under house arrest, there was no other request. This court is no less caught than the Constitutional Court, twice postponing the trial for objective reasons, which calls the obligation to appear constitutional. Today we are in front of this decision, the obligation to appear. We come again at the top of the time. The decision has not been disclosed, but this decision is the worst solution ever given, it has not solved any problem. The prosecutor has not requested another security measure, they remain under house arrest. The prosecutor says that my words are right, we haven't started the trial yet. An executable order must be made and communicated. We have to see what will happen", said Gjokutaj.
The lawyer of the former prime minister attacked the GJKKO Appeal, calling it a captured court like all the others. Where the decision according to him is strange, since the judge has left the object of the trial. Gjokutaj says that SPAK did not request this security measure, but the return of the house arrest security measure.
"With a strange decision-making, the GJKKO Appeal, on the prosecution's appeal based on a decision of the First Instance on the revocation of the measure for Berisha, mainly decided to replace the measure. We are clear that the object of this judgment was the request for the repeal of the decision of the first instance. The prosecutor stood by the measure of house arrest, there was no other request.
This court is no less caught than the Constitutional Court, twice postponing the trial for objective reasons, which calls the obligation to appear constitutional, which did not enter into the request for clarification of the restriction of the freedom of a member of parliament. You know this saga and today we are faced with this decision, the obligation to appear. We come back to the top of the story, to this story," said Gjokutaj.
Lini një Përgjigje