FLASH
Shkruar nga Pamfleti
Former Minister of Defense Fatmir Mediu appeared before the court today for the "Gërdeci" case. In his speech, Mediu said that the re-opening of the criminal case in my charge and even more the continuation of this trial, is clearly contrary to the Criminal Code and the Criminal Procedural Code, the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia, as well as the European Convention on Freedoms and Fundamental Human Rights.
According to him, the case of "Gërdec" was reopened without having any evidence or concrete facts to make this process even though more than 10 years have passed since the event.
Mediu also added that the reopening of this case, in flagrant violation of the law, is an indication of the lack of guarantees for a fair legal process on your part.
"Dear Madam Judge,
Apart from family members, everyone else has a moral obligation, but when the case is also an institutional obligation, to make the assessment and judgment about that event based only on facts.
Above all, this obligation is for the prosecution and the court, as two competent institutions that legally assess the criminal responsibilities of the individual. It is completely clear that the re-opening of the criminal case in my charge and even more so the continuation of this trial, is openly contrary to the Criminal Code and the Criminal Procedural Code, to the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia, as well as to the European Convention on the Fundamental Rights and Freedoms of Man.
I want to believe that the drive to reopen this case and continue the trial is not political and that you do not have or support political interests in this process. As a prosecutor and judge, it is clear that you do not lack professional ability and knowledge of criminal law and beyond. Therefore, you must have the courage to strictly respect the law and only the law", said Mediu.
Former Minister Mediu said that there is no evidence or new fact that would justify reopening the case even though more than 10 years have passed. It also raises some questions as to why the case was not opened earlier when he was never avoided or hidden.
"Let me put the following to you:
Article 66 of the Criminal Code provides that criminal prosecution cannot be carried out if 10 years have passed from the day the offense was committed to the day the person is charged, in the case of the criminal offense of abuse of office.
What is the legal basis that has given the prosecution the right to charge me, since more than 10 years have passed since March 15, 2008, the moment when a criminal offense is thought to have been committed? Which article of the Criminal Code provides for the suspension of the statute of limitations for criminal prosecution?
The Criminal Code also does not provide for the suspension of the statute of limitations for the execution of the sentence. The Supreme Court with unifying decision no. 1, dated 28.10.2022, has confirmed the determination of the Criminal Code, according to which there is no suspension of the statute of limitations for the execution of the criminal decision.
When there is no suspension of the statute of limitations for the execution of the sentence, for convicts who flee and hide from justice, how can there be a suspension of the statute of limitations for criminal prosecution for an individual who has not been investigated for over 10 years and who is presumed innocent ?!!!
What prevented the prosecution from reopening the case against me, re-investigating, filing charges, from 2009 to 2022? I was here, I didn't hide, I didn't avoid any possible investigation?!!! For more than 15 years I have almost never been asked. Not only that but I insisted that the Supreme Court in the 2009 trial continue the trial?!!!! I have asked the General Prosecutor's Office to withdraw the acts and ask the Assembly to revoke the immunity. The General Prosecutor's Office did not do this and consequently the Supreme Court decided to stay the trial despite my request to continue it.
What evidence or new circumstances have appeared even after the 10-year statute of limitations has passed, that prompted the prosecution/SPAK to reopen this process? No evidence, no new data. Moreover, even in these two years of alleged investigation, the prosecution/SPAK added absolutely nothing more than what was contained in the investigation of 2008-2009. In the decision to reopen the process and send the case to court, the decision of the Supreme Court no. 1106, dated 21.12.2021. In paragraph 23 of this decision, it is clearly defined that at the moment of the final disposition of the prosecutor for the exercise of criminal prosecution and sending the case to court, the deadlines provided for in Article 66 of the Criminal Code will be evaluated. Not even the prosecutor did this, but you, as a court, are not doing it either?
Can you tell me, dear prosecutor, where does your courage come from to blatantly ignore the Criminal Code regarding the statute of limitations, to ignore the decisions of the Supreme Court, but also the decisions of the Strasbourg Court for this criminal institute?!!!" , said Fatmir Mediu in court.
Lini një Përgjigje