FLASH
Shkruar nga Pamfleti
Lawyers Adriatik Lapaj and Kujtim Cakrani are involved in a debate regarding the Criminal Amnesty and those who should benefit from the reduction of the sentence. According to Cakran, even serious crimes, such as murder, can be amnestied if the person has been fully rehabilitated.
While on the other hand, Lapaj categorically opposed the reduction of the punishment for serious crimes, as it can promote revenge and problems in the family where the damage was done.
According to him, the criminal amnesty is for light crimes and categorically not for the murders or rapes of children.
Cakrani: Now we have to understand that someone who has been sentenced for 25 years, even for murder, but even for something else, if he has suffered 22 years, what is the problem with reducing his sentence and benefiting, since he can be rehabilitated.
Lapaj: A man who has killed someone must have passed enough time for the children to have grown up, to have gotten married, for the matter to have cooled down, since he went out on the street and was killed on the street.
Those 2 years make a difference, go and tell him that they killed someone at home that it doesn't make a difference. There are no principles with murder, there are principles with fines, for those who are caught with 2 hashish cigarettes, with the one who stole a phone, or who stole electricity, and there is no amnesty for those who kill.
Lini një Përgjigje