DREAM / The Prime Minister resigns and wakes up under the Parisian bridge!

 Kliko këtu për të tjera
Voxpress:

How the Reform in Justice made us drink the juice of the interceptions of January 21

2023-01-23 20:42:57Pikëpamje SHKRUAR NGA DORIAN MATLIJA
How the Reform in Justice made us drink the juice of the interceptions of
Dorian Matlija

I don't like talking about January 21st on January 21st, when the media and politics make it a common thread and then forget about it. Today is January 22, and it's over.

For two days, news/speculations have been circulating that there are some recordings of radio communications between the guards on January 21, 2011. For these recordings to constitute evidence for investigations, they must exist, be authentic, be unmodified, and be clearly audible. However, records alone do not count unless they are accompanied by other evidence, that is, evidence that those orders were actually given.

We take a moment that all the conditions are met. What are registrations good for?

If you read the text, it looks like the commander of the Guard gives the order to shoot the body. It does not yet appear that this is an order from above the commander. Four people were killed that day. Two were accused and convicted, among them the one who is assumed from these records to have given the order.

However, they were punished, regardless of what they were punished for and how much they were punished.

Before 2017, the law provided that if new evidence came out, the court's decision would be revised and the case would be reopened. This applied to all convicts. An exception was made only for the decisions of innocence that were reviewed no later than 5 years after the decision. This was Article 449 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

On the occasion of the Justice Reform, this article was revised. Euralius and law professors debated whether the 5-year limit should be removed altogether, or whether acquittals should not be reviewed at all, even if there is new evidence. However, this had nothing to do with January 21, because the guards were not acquitted. They were convicted.

When suddenly, in a meeting of the laws committee there from March 2017, the text of Article 449 underwent a strange change there towards the end of the meeting. It was written there that not only the verdicts of acquittal, but also the verdicts of conviction are not reviewed when the position of the convicted person was aggravated, even if new evidence came out. So, if any new evidence appeared on the scene that could punish the convict more, this would no longer be allowed.

Unë vetë reagova nga të parët sepse më digjte kjo çështja e 21 janarit me të cilën po merresha. Ishte atentat i mirëfilltë ndaj çështjes. Reaguan një tufë organizatash të shoqërisë civile. Reaguan edhe organizata te llojit politik, si nisma Thurje, nisma Sfida, etj. Madje një grup organizatash i shkruan Presidentit që të kthente mbrapsht ligjin sepse ky neni 449 nuk duhej të kalonte kështu. Në letër thuhej troç që ky nen do mbyllte përfundimisht dosjet e krimeve. Shkruan dhe gazeta e portale në atë kohë. Nuk reflektoi askush.

Tani, neni 449 është pjesë e Kodit dhe është kapaku i artë për rigjykimin e atyre që u dënuan një herë për 21 janarin. Jo vetëm përgjime të dalin, por sikur vetë ata të dalin e ta bërtasin te sheshi Skënderbej që vranë me dashje e dhanë urdhra, prapë dosja nuk hapet.

As long as there are no recordings directly implicating other uninvestigated persons (and with this text of the wiretaps, no minister is heard giving orders), we will drink the juice of these wiretaps because we cannot even start the case against Ndrea Prendi, so that they come out again on to another. The reform in Justice put the cork on the bottle like in those Arab tales where the genie could not get out of the curse of the seal on the cork.


Në përputhje me standarded JTI

story

 Read
Monika Stafa / 2023-01-14 13:26:56Point of Views

Video

SHIKO KANALIN NE YOUTUBE
×