All of the 29 defendants accused on terrorism charges in the “Divo Naselje” case have pleaded not guilty to terrorism charges at today’s public hearing to review the indictment on the events which occurred in Kumanovo on the 9th and 10th of May this year. The hearing took place under increased security measures and strict controls on entry and exit points of the building of the Supreme Court.
Due to the heightened security measures, the session today began with an hour delay. Sitting on the Judicial Council to review the indictment were Judges Ognen Stavrev, Jani Nicha and Ljubinka Baseska. Acting for the prosecution from the Public Prosecutor’s Office for Organized Crime & Corruption were Naum Panovski and Vilma Ruskovska.
From the outset of today’s session, lawyers acting for the defendants complained, maintaining that the case should be taken over by the Special Public Prosecutor, with all documentation being made available to the Special Prosecutor Katica Janeva, on the grounds that this matter originates from the illegal interception of communications.
Defence lawyer Shazifar Iseni along with his colleague Nasser Raufi pressed the exclusion of the Public Prosecution from the case because, both lawyers claiming that it was patently obvious that this cases belongs within the jurisdiction of the Special Prosecutor’s Office. Mr Raufi said the request for exemption would be submitted to the Council of Public Prosecutors, following Mr Raufi and Mr Iseni objections, the Chamber took a 15 minute adjournment to confer on the lawyers submissions.
Once the Chamber had reconvened Judges informed the defence lawyers that the Criminal Procedure Code clearly stated where and when such a submission should and could be delivered, the present not being that time and place the session resumed from where it had left off prior to the adjournment.
All 29 defendants names were read out after which followed a brief explanation from the prosecutor concerning the indictment, this included a chronological timetable of events. From the original attack at a watchtower used at Gosince checkpoint, to the events in Divo Naselije on the 9th and 10th of May. The prosecutor delivered a summary of available evidence, analysis, expert opinion, and details of other actions that were undertaken during the timetable of the investigation.
Concerning the events in Kumanovo’s Divo Naselje, the prosecutor pointed out that law enforcement officers from the Special Task Unit acted on a court order to search the premises in connection with crimes relating to a terrorist attack of the Gosince watchtower incident, pointing out officers were searching for persons involved in the attack.
“While approaching premises the officers came under attack from an armed group inside. A grenade was thrown at officers, due to which, several officers sustained injuries, the attack continued with bursts of automatic gunfire, and sniper fire using other weapons. Exchanges of gunfire between terrorists and officers lasted throughout the rest of the day and night, from the 9th of May, lasting until the next day, the 10th of May. The resulting carnage claimed the lives of the heavily armed terrorist group, and eight police officers lost their lives, while several other law enforcement members were seriously injured”, stated Prosecutor Panovski.
Prosecutor Panovski went on to point out that based on the available evidence the prosecution believed that the indictment merited confirmation of review from the Council. The Council of Judges, citing regulations of the Laws on Criminal Procedure. asked each of the accused to enter pleas of guilty or not guilty to the criminal acts the prosecution had described to the court. In response, lawyers for the accused, who had filed objections to the indictment, with some lawyers entering objections on behalf of all the accused, laid out their objections in full.
Defence for the accused, in explaining their objections stated that according to the results of the investigating procedure, it was clear “that what preceded the filing of the indictment was the best example of how not to carry out an investigation, in particular, to the nature of the offences listed in it.
” In this case, we dodo not have a complete investigation, and if is the maximum that the prosecution can offer to you, the Council, for assessment of the indictment, according to Judge’s rights and obligations the LCP (Law for Criminal Procedure), then you, the judges are obliged not to allow it”, said the defence attorney for the accused.
The session is still in progress and is expected to be completed late this afternoon.
