Reçak Massacre Case: Čedomir Aksić’s Conviction Sent Back for Retrial

RksNews
RksNews 2 Min Read
2 Min Read

The Kosovo Court of Appeals has ordered a retrial in the case of Čedomir Aksić, who was previously sentenced in absentia to 15 years in prison for war crimes related to the Reçak massacre in 1999, in which 45 Albanian civilians were killed.

The Special Department of the Court of Appeals accepted Aksić’s lawyer’s appeal, annulled the Prishtina Basic Court verdict, and returned the case for retrial and sentencing.

The Appeals Court found essential violations of procedural law, noting that the trial had been conducted without reasonable efforts to notify the accused or secure his presence:

“The first-instance judgment violated essential provisions of criminal procedure under Article 384, paragraph 1, subparagraph 1.3 of the CPC, as the trial in absentia was held without fulfilling the legal conditions of Article 303, paragraphs 7 and 8. The court failed to make reasonable efforts to notify the accused and ensure his attendance at the trial.”

Specifically, the Appeals Court concluded that the Basic Court ignored the requirements of Article 303, paragraph 8 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which mandates that a trial in absentia can only proceed after a full informational campaign. This includes publishing the summons and indictment on the websites of the Prosecutor and the court, in the official gazette, and issuing a public call for anyone with information on the accused’s whereabouts to notify authorities.

The Appeals Court noted that the first-instance court completely bypassed these cumulative legal steps, failing to ensure that Aksić was given a fair opportunity to participate in the trial.

Aksić was originally sentenced in December 2024, marking the first war crimes verdict in Kosovo’s Basic Court handed down in absentia. The sentence included his participation in the Reçak massacre, one of the most notorious atrocities during the 1999 conflict.

This retrial underscores the importance of strict adherence to due process, even in high-profile war crimes cases, to ensure that convictions are legally sound and defensible.