The Court of Appeals has rejected the appeal filed by Dragiša Vicentijević’s defense attorney, Miloš Delević, regarding the suspension of the detention measure for the suspect involved in the attack on the Ibër-Lepenc canal.
This was made known based on the decision of the Court of Appeals, which was secured by the Deputy Administrator of the Court of Appeals for “Oath for Justice.”
Previously, the Basic Court in Pristina – Special Department had ordered a one-month detention for the defendant D.V. due to reasonable suspicion that he had committed the criminal offense of “Endangering the constitutional order by destroying or damaging public installations and equipment” under Article 122, “Committing a terrorist act” under Article 129, and unauthorized possession of weapons under Article 366 of the Kosovo Criminal Code.
Regarding this decision, Vicentijeviq’s defense attorney, Deleviq, filed an appeal with the Court of Appeals, claiming that the decision violated legal provisions and contained an incorrect assessment of the factual situation. The defense sought approval of the appeal and the release of Vicentijeviq from detention.
In the appeal, attorney Deleviq emphasized that there was no evidence to support the suspicion that his client committed the crimes he was charged with.
Furthermore, he argued that the evidence presented by the Prosecutor’s Office regarding the suspicion of Vicentijeviq’s involvement in the attack was based solely on the discovery of weapons and wet boots at his home, which he argued only relates to the criminal offense of unauthorized possession of weapons.
Regarding the claim that the defendant might flee, the lawyer highlighted that Vicentijeviq is a citizen of the Republic of Kosovo, owns all his assets there, has no connections in Serbia, and has weak financial standing, which makes fleeing impossible.
This appeal was opposed by the Prosecutor’s Office, which requested that it be dismissed as unfounded.
Based on the Court of Appeals’ reasoning, it was concluded that there was reasonable suspicion regarding the crimes the defendant was charged with. During a police search, two AK47 rifles, a pistol, three loaded and three empty magazines, three hand grenades, and 100 rounds of ammunition were found.
Therefore, the court stated that there is a legal basis to continue the detention measure at this stage of the proceedings.
The Court of Appeals also emphasized that the discovery of these weapons at the defendant’s home increased the likelihood of the defendant repeating criminal offenses, considering that he is a recidivist and is also suspected of the criminal offense of “Murder of the first degree.”
Furthermore, the court reasoning highlighted the risk that the country faced during the attack, which endangered the supply of essential services such as drinking water and electricity.
Additionally, regarding the defense lawyer’s claims that the legal conditions for continuing detention were not met, the Court of Appeals emphasized that, based on the case file, the defendant had taken actions in the commission of crimes that were related to other offenses under investigation, as specified in the contested decision. Therefore, the court concluded that there was reasonable suspicion of the defendant’s involvement in the listed criminal acts.
