The Basic Court in Pristina has issued a ruling rejecting the defense’s requests to dismiss the indictment and challenge the evidence presented by the defense of Vladimir Toliq, Dushan Maksimović, and Blagoje Spasojević in the “Banjska” terrorism case, which was filed against the indictment of the Special Prosecutor’s Office.
The indictment of the Special Prosecutor’s Office, filed on September 11, 2024, charges 44 individuals and one legal entity, “RAD D.O.O.” The list of the accused is led by Milan Radoičić, as reported by “Betimi për Drejtësi”.
So far, those arrested and placed under detention in this case are: Blagoje Spasojević, Vladimir Toliq, and Dushan Maksimović, for whom separate criminal proceedings have been initiated.
At the preliminary hearing held on October 9, 2024, the three defendants pleaded not guilty. Subsequently, the defense utilized the 30-day period to challenge the evidence and request the dismissal of the indictment.
Toliq’s defense attorney, Millosh Delević, filed a challenge on November 5, 2024, emphasizing that at this stage of the criminal procedure, there are grounds to dismiss the indictment in its entirety, as there is no evidence to substantiate the suspicion that his client committed the criminal offense.
According to Delević, the Special Prosecutor’s Office (SPRK) did not specify any action in how the criminal offense was committed.
“…therefore, it is not understood whether my client was a leader, executor, accomplice, or instigator, even though we have had an investigation for a year and many witnesses have been heard, such an answer has not been provided,” Delević stated in his challenge.
It is mentioned that the Prosecutor’s Office did not specify the responsibilities of the participants.
“The only fact linking my client to the alleged criminal acts is that he was wearing a uniform and was severely injured on the critical day, while his role remains completely unknown to the court, defense, and the public. Therefore, this indictment does not meet the legal requirements to be reviewed in court,” Delević added in his challenge.
Delević requested that the indictment against Vladimir Toliq be dismissed as unfounded, or the case be returned to the SPRK for amendment, or that a session be scheduled to review and assess this request.
Meanwhile, Spasojević’s defense attorney, Ljubomir Pantović, in a challenge filed on November 4, 2024, emphasized that there is no well-founded suspicion in the indictment against his client and the other accused. He argued that there is no admissible evidence to prove that Spasojević committed the criminal act charged against him.
It is stated that the actions of the accused are not specified, and the legal classification of the criminal offenses is also contested.
“The defense added that the only thing that could link my client to the actions described in this part of the SPRK’s indictment is that he was arrested at the scene on the critical day, but this is not sufficient to support a well-founded suspicion that he committed the criminal offense he is accused of, and what is missing in this case is the factual description of the actions he specifically took,” Pantović stated in his challenge.
Pantović also claims that the indictment is flawed and incomplete. Therefore, he requested that the indictment against his client be dismissed or that a session be scheduled to review and evaluate this request.
On the other hand, Maksimović’s defense attorney, Jovana Filipović, in her request to dismiss the indictment filed on November 4, 2024, stated that the claims of the Prosecutor’s Office in the indictment against her client are unfounded and based on assumptions, and that no evidence supports the well-founded suspicion that Maksimović committed the criminal acts charged against him.
“The SPRK has never proven that my client had any connection to the event in Banjska on September 24, 2023, other than the fact that he lives in the same village, and no other evidence connects him to the suspect,” Filipović stated in her request.
It is mentioned that the SPRK raised the indictment without prior established factual findings and in violation of the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code.
“…the indictment is based solely and exclusively on assumptions and general statements from witnesses, all of which contradict the evidence, as it has been established that my client’s DNA does not match any of the items, and it is also proven that he did not shoot on the critical day and was not exposed to gunpowder residue,” Filipović stated in her request, calling for the dismissal of the SPRK’s indictment.
Meanwhile, the state prosecutor, in his response to the defense’s requests filed on November 19, 2024, emphasized that the defense’s claims are unfounded and do not correspond to the factual reality.
“…the defense should consider that at this stage of the procedure, the evidence is evaluated in two parallel aspects: their admissibility and their probative value regarding the existence of a well-founded suspicion, which means that, for the latter, proof is required to demonstrate whether an objective observer would be convinced that the indictment is supported by evidence of the circumstances in which the criminal offense is alleged to have occurred, from which evidence the well-founded suspicion arises. Otherwise, at this stage of the procedure, there can be no evaluation of the evidence concerning the circumstances related to guilt,” the prosecutor stated in his response.
Furthermore, it was emphasized that the evidence was lawfully obtained by the Prosecutor’s Office and Police. It was also noted that the indictment is supported by evidence of the circumstances under which the alleged criminal acts were committed.
“The evidence proposed in the indictment, whether material or personal, proves the foundation of the organized structure (of which the three defendants are part), the preparatory actions, and the attack on the critical day,” the prosecutor stressed in his response.
The prosecutor also emphasized that the conditions for the dismissal of the indictment under Article 248 of the Criminal Procedure Code are not met. Therefore, the state prosecutor requested that the defense’s requests be rejected as unfounded.
Regarding these requests, the Court has determined that the evidence upon which the indictment is based was lawfully obtained and that there is no evidence that could be inadmissible or obtained in violation of the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code.
The Court further stated that, although general objections were raised by the defense concerning the evidence, no specific objection was presented for any concrete evidence proposed in the indictment to be declared inadmissible, giving specific reasons for its exclusion.
The Court also concluded that the evidence is admissible and can be presented during the trial, and there is no element indicating that the evidence outlined in the indictment would infringe upon the rights of the accused guaranteed by the Constitution, noting that there is no legal basis for excluding any evidence as inadmissible.
Regarding the defense’s claims that the Prosecutor’s Office did not explain the roles of the defendants, such as whether they were executors, accomplices, or instigators, the Court assessed that these claims are unfounded, as at this stage of the procedure, such details cannot be reviewed, as the level of support for the indictment in this phase is based on well-founded suspicion.
On the other hand, concerning attorney Delević’s proposal for the indictment to be returned for supplementation, the Court ruled that these claims are unfounded.
According to the Court’s assessment, the well-founded suspicion that the defendants committed the criminal offenses charged against them is supported by material evidence that the Prosecutor proposed in the indictment.
“The Court has carefully analyzed the defense’s objections concerning the challenge of evidence and the request to dismiss the indictment, and has concluded that the prosecution has established a well-founded suspicion that the defendants committed the criminal acts they are accused of,” the ruling states.
The Court concludes that the well-founded suspicion that the defendants committed the criminal act charged against them is corroborated by material evidence and witness testimonies.
“Concerning the requests to dismiss the indictment, the Court concludes that the criminal offenses the defendants are accused of constitute a criminal act, which is sanctioned by law as an unlawful act. Furthermore, there is well-founded suspicion that the defendants’ actions manifest the elements of the criminal offenses as stated in the indictment,” the ruling concludes.
The Court also determined that there are no circumstances excluding the defendants’ criminal responsibility.
At this stage of the procedure, the Court considers that the Prosecutor’s indictment complies with the provisions of Article 235 of the Criminal Procedure Code, and based on its factual description and the statements contained in the indictment and the attached evidence, the requirement of well-founded suspicion is also met.
“After determining that the evidence was lawfully obtained by the investigative bodies, the Court concludes that the prosecution’s indictment meets all the legal requirements and is sufficient to proceed to the trial phase, where the Court has been careful not to elaborate on each piece of evidence individually or in connection with each other, in order to respect the principle of presumption of innocence,” the ruling states.
The Special Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Kosovo (SPRK) filed the indictment on September 11, 2024, against Milan Radoičić and 44 others for the terrorist attack on September 24, 2023, in Banjska, Zvečan. The accused are charged with using heavy weapons to attempt to separate the northern part of the Republic of Kosovo and annex it to the Republic of Serbia, resulting in the death of police officer Afrim Bunjaku and endangering the lives of other police officers and the civilian population.
The leader of this organized terrorist group, Milan Radoičić, is charged with ensuring income indirectly from 2017 until September 24, 2023, which he converted into real and movable property, part of which was transferred to third parties to conceal or mask the source of the wealth.
The 45 accused face charges of “Committing a Terrorist Act,” “Serious Offenses Against the Constitutional Order and Security of the Republic of Kosovo,” “Facilitating and Financing Terrorism,” and “Money Laundering.”
