Gjykata e Apelit e Dhomave t\u00eb Specializuara t\u00eb Kosov\u00ebs (DhSK) n\u00eb Hag\u00eb ka aprovuar pjes\u00ebrisht ankes\u00ebn e Prokuroris\u00eb ndaj vendimit p\u00ebr konfirmimin e aktakuz\u00ebs n\u00eb rastin ndaj Hashim Tha\u00e7it, Bashkim Smakajt, Isni Kilat, Fadil Fazliut dhe Hajredin Ku\u00e7it.<\/p>\n
Nga kat\u00ebr pika t\u00eb ankes\u00ebs s\u00eb ZPS-s\u00eb u pranua vet\u00ebm ajo q\u00eb kishte t\u00eb b\u00ebnte me p\u00ebrgjegj\u00ebsin\u00eb e Tha\u00e7it p\u00ebr nxitjen e Kilajt, Smakajt dhe Fazliut p\u00ebr t\u00eb kryer vepr\u00ebn penale t\u00eb pengimit t\u00eb personave zyrtar n\u00eb kryerjen e detyrave zyrtare<\/p>\n
Paneli i Apelit i ka marr\u00eb vendim q\u00eb nj\u00eb nga kat\u00ebr pikat q\u00eb kishte ngritur ZPS-ja kund\u00ebr vendimit p\u00ebr konfirmimin e aktakuz\u00ebs ndaj Hashim Tha\u00e7it, Bashkim Smakajt, Fadil Fazliut dhe Hajredin Ku\u00e7it, ta pranoj lidhur me p\u00ebrgjegj\u00ebsin\u00eb penale t\u00eb Tha\u00e7it p\u00ebr \u2018nxitje\u2019 n\u00eb kryerjen e vepr\u00ebs penal \u201cpengim i personave zyrtar n\u00eb kryerjen e detyrave zyrtare.<\/p>\n
Pika e kat\u00ebr e ankes\u00ebs s\u00eb ZPS-s\u00eb kishte t\u00eb b\u00ebnte me kund\u00ebrshtimin e konstatimit t\u00eb gjyqtares q\u00eb neni 32 (3) i KPRK-s\u00eb nuk zbatohet p\u00ebr vepr\u00ebn e \u201cPengim i personave zyrtar\u201d sipas nenit 401 (3) dhe (5) t\u00eb KPRK-s\u00eb.<\/p>\n
Sipas ZPS-s\u00eb, gjyqtarja ka gabuar kur ka konstatuar se p\u00ebr shkak se neni 401 (3) dhe (5) t\u00eb KPRK-s\u00eb nuk parashikon d\u00ebnim deri n\u00eb pes\u00eb vjet burgim, p\u00ebr rrjedhoj\u00eb neni 32 (1) nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb i zbatuesh\u00ebm pasi sipas saj kjo dispozit\u00eb zbatohet vet\u00ebm p\u00ebr vepra q\u00eb jan\u00eb t\u00eb d\u00ebnueshme me pakt s\u00eb pes\u00eb vjet.<\/p>\n
Sipas ZPS-s\u00eb, Gjykat\u00ebsi i Procedur\u00ebs Paraprake ka gabuar duke konstatuar se, p\u00ebr shkak se neni 401(3) dhe (5) i KPK-s\u00eb parashikon d\u00ebnim nga nj\u00eb deri n\u00eb pes\u00eb vjet burgim, neni 32(3) nuk ishte i zbatuesh\u00ebm, pasi kjo dispozit\u00eb zbatohet vet\u00ebm p\u00ebr vepra t\u00eb d\u00ebnueshme me t\u00eb pakt\u00ebn pes\u00eb vjet burgim.<\/p>\n
Mbrojtja e Tha\u00e7it kishte th\u00ebn\u00eb se gjyqtarja e ka interpretuar sakt\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb nen.<\/p>\n
Neni 32 (3 ) i KPRK-s\u00eb p\u00ebr \u201cShtytje\u201d thot\u00eb se \u201cKushdo q\u00eb me dashje shtyt\u00eb personin tjet\u00ebr t\u00eb kryej\u00eb vep\u00ebr penale t\u00eb d\u00ebnueshme me s\u00eb paku pes\u00eb (5) vjet burgim dhe vepra penale as q\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb tentuar, shtyt\u00ebsi d\u00ebnohet p\u00ebr tentativ\u00eb\u201d.<\/p>\n
Sipas Panelit, gjyqtarja kishte konstatuar se vepra q\u00eb bie n\u00eb nenin 401 (3) t\u00eb KPRK-s\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb e d\u00ebnueshme nga 1 deri n\u00eb 5 vjet burgim, prandaj e p\u00ebrjashtoi p\u00ebrgjegj\u00ebsin\u00eb e Tha\u00e7it sipas nenit 32 (3) t\u00eb KPRK-s\u00eb p\u00ebr pik\u00ebn 1, 4 dhe 4 t\u00eb aktakuz\u00ebs.<\/p>\n
Ve\u00e7 k\u00ebsaj, paneli kishte th\u00ebn\u00eb se ka mospajtime p\u00ebr interpretimin e k\u00ebtij neni pasi sipas tyre, panele me t\u00eb ul\u00ebta e kan\u00eb interpretu q\u00eb ky nen \u00ebsht\u00eb i zbatuesh\u00ebm p\u00ebr veprat penale t\u00eb d\u00ebnueshme mbi pes\u00eb vjet dhe disa p\u00ebr ato t\u00eb d\u00ebnueshme n\u00ebn 5 vjet.<\/p>\n
N\u00eb vendim thuhet se me shumic\u00eb votash, Paneli ka r\u00ebn\u00eb dakord me ZPS-s\u00eb duke th\u00ebn\u00eb se neni 32 (3) duhet t\u00eb zbatohet p\u00ebr vepra q\u00eb p\u00ebrfshijn\u00eb ose edhe i tejkalojn\u00eb pes\u00eb vite.<\/p>\n
\u201cSi rezultat, Paneli konstaton, me shumic\u00eb votash, se duke qen\u00eb se vepra e pengimit t\u00eb personave zyrtar\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb e d\u00ebnueshme n\u00eb format e saj t\u00eb r\u00ebnduara me burgim nga nj\u00eb (1) deri n\u00eb pes\u00eb (5) vjet, forma e tret\u00eb e nxitjes sipas nenit 32(3) t\u00eb KPK-s\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb e zbatueshme n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb rast\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendim.<\/p>\n
Si rrjedhoj\u00eb, ata e konsideruan gabim konstatimin e gjyqtares s\u00eb ky nen nuk ishte i zbatuesh\u00ebm p\u00ebr vepr\u00ebn \u201cpengim t\u00eb personave zyrtar n\u00eb kryerjen e detyrave zyrtare. K\u00ebshtu q\u00eb paneli, pranoi pik\u00ebn kat\u00ebr t\u00eb ankes\u00ebs s\u00eb ZPS-s\u00eb.<\/p>\n
\u201cDuke qen\u00eb se konstatimi p\u00ebr ekzistenc\u00ebn e nj\u00eb dyshimi t\u00eb bazuar mir\u00eb se Tha\u00e7i i ka nxitur Fazliun, Smakajn dhe Kilajn p\u00ebr t\u00eb kryer vepr\u00ebn penale t\u00eb pengimit t\u00eb personave zyrtar\u00eb p\u00ebrfshin nj\u00eb vler\u00ebsim faktik t\u00eb provave, \u00e7\u00ebshtja i kthehet Gjykat\u00ebsit t\u00eb Procedur\u00ebs Paraprake p\u00ebr shqyrtim t\u00eb m\u00ebtejsh\u00ebm\u201d, thuhet tutje n\u00eb vendim<\/p>\n
Ndryshe, n\u00eb pik\u00ebn e par\u00eb t\u00eb k\u00ebsaj ankese, Prokuroria ka th\u00ebn\u00eb se gjyqtarja q\u00eb konfirmoi aktakuz\u00ebn ka gabuar n\u00eb interpretimin e Nenit 35 (1) t\u00eb KPRK-s\u00eb. Sipas ZPS-s\u00eb, gjyqtarja ka th\u00ebn\u00eb se ky nen k\u00ebrkon q\u00eb elementet e vepr\u00ebs penale t\u00eb ekzistojn\u00eb n\u00eb koh\u00ebn e marr\u00ebveshjes dhe n\u00eb rast q\u00eb nuk d\u00ebshmohet se nuk ka pas grup p\u00ebr kryerjen e vepr\u00ebs penale sipas nenit 401 (2) t\u00eb KPK-s\u00eb at\u00ebher\u00eb akuzat nuk q\u00ebndrojn\u00eb.<\/p>\n
ZPS-ja thot\u00eb se neni i par\u00eb nuk k\u00ebrkon q\u00eb duhet t\u00eb jen\u00eb t\u00eb gjitha elementet e vepr\u00ebs penale q\u00eb ai t\u00eb behet i zbatuesh\u00ebm dhe se interpretimi i gjyqtares bie ne kund\u00ebrshtim me praktik\u00ebn gjyq\u00ebsore t\u00eb DhSK-s\u00eb.<\/p>\n
ZPS pretendon se gjyqtarja gabimisht refuzoi p\u00ebrgjegj\u00ebsin\u00eb penale t\u00eb Tha\u00e7it dhe Ku\u00e7it p\u00ebr pik\u00ebn 2 dhe 19 t\u00eb aktakuz\u00ebs q\u00eb kan\u00eb t\u00eb b\u00ebjn\u00eb me marr\u00ebveshjen p\u00ebr t\u00eb kryer vepr\u00ebn penale pengim t\u00eb personave zyrtar n\u00eb kryerjen e detyrave zyrtare sipas nenit 35 (1) dhe 401 (2) t\u00eb KPRK-s\u00eb<\/p>\n
ZPS-ja k\u00ebrkoi q\u00eb Apeli t\u00eb rivendos p\u00ebrgjegj\u00ebsin\u00eb sipas k\u00ebtyre neneve ose ta kthej \u00e7\u00ebshtjen tek gjyqtarja e procedur\u00ebs paraprake p\u00ebr ta zbatuar sakt\u00ebsisht ligjin.<\/p>\n
Tha\u00e7i, i p\u00ebrfaq\u00ebsuar nga mbrojtja e tij kishte th\u00ebn\u00eb se ZPS-ja s\u2019ka arrit\u00eb t\u00eb argumentoj se gjyqtarja ka gabuar n\u00eb interpretimin dhe zbatimin e k\u00ebtyre neneve. Ai kishte argumentuar se sakt\u00eb u konstatua se \u201celementet materiale t\u00eb vepr\u00ebs duhet t\u00eb ekzistojn\u00eb n\u00eb koh\u00ebn e marr\u00ebveshjes\u201d dhe se ekzistenca ose formimi i nj\u00eb grupi prej t\u00eb pakt\u00ebn tre personash duhet t\u00eb d\u00ebshmohet me prova.<\/p>\n
Tha\u00e7i kishte argumentuar se pretendimet e ZPS-s\u00eb ishin spekulative dhe se transkripti i vizit\u00ebs s\u00eb 3 shtatorit 2023 \u00ebsht\u00eb i paqart\u00eb, konfuz \u00eb dhe se \u00ebsht\u00eb i pamjaftuesh\u00ebm p\u00ebr t\u00eb v\u00ebrtetuar se Tha\u00e7i dhe Ku\u00e7i kan\u00eb diskutuar p\u00ebr p\u00ebrfshirjen e nj\u00eb grupi t\u00eb tret\u00eb n\u00eb planin p\u00ebr t\u00eb kontaktuar me d\u00ebshmitarin 6.<\/p>\n
N\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb pik\u00eb, paneli ka konstatuar se gjyqtarja e procedur\u00ebs paraprake ke gabuar kur ka deklaruar se elementet e vepr\u00ebs penale duhet t\u00eb ekzistonin n\u00eb koh\u00ebn e marr\u00ebveshjes sipas nenit 35 (1) t\u00eb KPRK-s\u00eb.<\/p>\n
Prandaj, Paneli gjen se Gjyqtari i Procedur\u00ebs Paraprake ka gabuar kur ka deklaruar se \u201celementet materiale t\u00eb vepr\u00ebs penale duhet t\u00eb ekzistojn\u00eb n\u00eb koh\u00ebn e marr\u00ebveshjes\u201d sipas nenit 35(1) t\u00eb KPK-s\u00eb.<\/p>\n
\u201cMegjithat\u00eb, do t\u00eb thot\u00eb se marr\u00ebveshja midis autor\u00ebve t\u00eb dyshuar \u2013 Tha\u00e7it dhe Ku\u00e7it \u2013 duhet t\u00eb lidhet me faktin se pengimi i synuar do t\u00eb kryhet si pjes\u00eb e nj\u00eb \u201cgrupi\u201d t\u00eb p\u00ebrb\u00ebr\u00eb nga t\u00eb pakt\u00ebn tre persona, si\u00e7 p\u00ebrcaktohet n\u00eb nenin 113(12) t\u00eb KPK-s\u00eb. Me fjal\u00eb t\u00eb tjera, autor\u00ebt e dyshuar duhet t\u00eb ken\u00eb nj\u00eb marr\u00ebveshje p\u00ebr elementet p\u00ebrb\u00ebr\u00ebse t\u00eb vepr\u00ebs penale sipas nenit 401(2) t\u00eb KPK-s\u00eb, duke p\u00ebrfshir\u00eb pjes\u00ebmarrjen e nj\u00eb personi t\u00eb tret\u00eb\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendim.<\/p>\n
Por p\u00ebr ta v\u00ebrtetuar ekzistenc\u00ebn e nj\u00eb marr\u00ebveshje, Paneli thot\u00eb se nuk mund t\u00eb thuhet se \u00ebsht\u00eb grup vet\u00ebm nga marr\u00ebveshja e Tha\u00e7it dhe Ku\u00e7it p\u00ebr t\u00eb p\u00ebrfshir\u00eb nj\u00eb person t\u00eb tret\u00eb pa prova se personi n\u00eb fjal\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb pjes\u00eb e grupit ose do t\u00eb jet\u00eb.<\/p>\n
Si rrjedhoj\u00eb, paneli ka rrezuar pik\u00ebn e par\u00eb t\u00eb ankes\u00ebs s\u00eb ZPS-s\u00eb.<\/p>\n
N\u00eb pik\u00ebn e dyt\u00eb, ZPS-ja pretendoi se gjyqtarja t ka gabuar kur ka konstatuar se meq\u00eb Smakaj, Kilaj dhe Fazliu nuk ishin pal\u00eb n\u00eb procedurat e rastit t\u00eb Tha\u00e7it p\u00ebr krime lufte, ata nuk kan\u00eb pasur obligime ligjore sipas nenit 392 t\u00eb KPRK-s\u00eb q\u00eb ka t\u00eb b\u00ebj\u00eb me \u201cMosp\u00ebrfillje t\u00eb gjykat\u00ebs\u201d.<\/p>\n
ZPS-ja kishte marr\u00eb shembull rastet n\u00eb Tribunalin Nd\u00ebrkomb\u00ebtar p\u00ebr ish-Jugosllavin\u00eb duke shtuar se personat q\u00eb nuk ishin pal\u00eb n\u00eb proces ishin ndjekur penalisht p\u00ebr mosrespektim t\u00eb gjykat\u00ebs duke p\u00ebrfshir\u00eb edhe zbulimin e informacioneve konfidenciale.<\/p>\n
Prokuroria kishte th\u00ebn\u00eb se qasja e gjyqtares \u00ebsht\u00eb shqet\u00ebsuese p\u00ebr shkak t\u00eb pandeshkueshmeris\u00eb duke d\u00ebrguar mesazh t\u00eb rreziksh\u00ebm se individ\u00ebt q\u00eb nuk jan\u00eb pal\u00eb n\u00eb nj\u00eb \u00e7\u00ebshtje, mund t\u00eb mos i binden urdhrave t\u00eb gjykat\u00ebs lidhur me mbrojtjen e d\u00ebshmitar\u00ebve.<\/p>\n
Si rrjedhoj\u00eb, ZPS-ja kishte k\u00ebrkuar q\u00eb Apeli t\u2019i rivendos pikat 14, 16 dhe 18 t\u00eb aktakuz\u00ebs ku p\u00ebrfshihet p\u00ebrgjegj\u00ebsia p\u00ebr bashk\u00ebkryerje n\u00eb vepr\u00ebn penal ose ndryshe ta kthej serish \u00e7\u00ebshtjen t\u00eb gjyqtarja p\u00ebr t\u00eb zbatuar ligjin.<\/p>\n
Mbrojtja e Tha\u00e7it e kishte argumentuar nenin n\u00eb fjal\u00eb duke th\u00ebn\u00eb se termi \u2018t\u2019i bindet\u2019 tregon se kjo vep\u00ebr penale mund t\u00eb kryhet vet\u00ebm nga personi ndaj t\u00eb cil\u00ebt ka nj\u00eb urdh\u00ebr gjyq\u00ebsor. P\u00ebr rrjedhoj\u00eb, ata kan\u00eb argumentuar se me t\u00eb drejt\u00eb gjyqtarja konstatoi se Smakaj, Kilaj dhe Fazliu nuk ishin pal\u00eb dhe as pjes\u00ebmarr\u00ebs n\u00eb procedura t\u00eb rastit p\u00ebr krime lufte dhe se ata nuk kan\u00eb pasur ndonj\u00eb detyrim ndaj gjykat\u00ebs.<\/p>\n
Edhe Kilaj kishte argumentuar se gjyqtarja ka arritur n\u00eb p\u00ebrfundim n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb t\u00eb arsyeshme duke vendosur q\u00eb ky nen nuk mund t\u00eb zbatohet p\u00ebr k\u00ebta persona.<\/p>\n
ZPS-ja ishte kund\u00ebrp\u00ebrgjigjur se n\u00eb nenin n\u00eb fjal\u00eb p\u00ebrmend\u00ebt fjala \u201ckushdo\u201d dhe nuk specifikon ndonj\u00eb pal\u00eb.<\/p>\n
Sipas panelit, pikat 9-12, 14, 16, 18 dhe 20 t\u00eb aktakuz\u00ebs s\u00eb dor\u00ebzuar nga ZPS-ja ka pretendime se mes 26 qershorit dhe 2 n\u00ebntorit 2023, Tha\u00e7i, Fazliu, Smakaj, Ku\u00e7i dhe Kilaj nuk iu bind\u00ebn urdhrave p\u00ebrfundimtar\u00eb t\u00eb p\u00ebrfshira n\u00eb vendimin p\u00ebr protokollin e kontaktit, si dhe se Tha\u00e7i dhe Kilaj nuk iu bind\u00ebn vendimit p\u00ebr masat mbrojt\u00ebse, t\u00eb dyja k\u00ebto vendime t\u00eb l\u00ebshuara nga gjykat\u00ebsi i procedur\u00ebs paraprake n\u00eb rastin p\u00ebr krime lufte.<\/p>\n
Sipas k\u00ebtyre vendimeve, pal\u00ebt dhe pjes\u00ebmarr\u00ebsit ishin urdh\u00ebruar q\u00eb t\u00eb moszbulojn\u00eb informacione konfidenciale p\u00ebr pal\u00eb q\u00eb nuk jan\u00eb pjes\u00ebmarr\u00ebse.<\/p>\n
Paneli thot\u00eb se pasi Fazliu, Smakaj dhe Kilaj \u201cnuk jan\u00eb as Pal\u00eb dhe as pjes\u00ebmarr\u00ebs\u201d n\u00eb ato procedura, k\u00ebto vendime \u201cnuk u imponojn\u00eb atyre detyrime t\u00eb drejtp\u00ebrdrejta q\u00eb mund t\u00eb mos iu bindeshin\u201d.<\/p>\n
Pra, paneli ka th\u00ebn\u00eb se kjo vep\u00ebr mund t\u00eb kryhet vet\u00ebm nga persona ndaj t\u00eb cil\u00ebve ka pasur urdh\u00ebr. Si rrjedhoj\u00eb, paneli hodhi posht\u00eb edhe pik\u00ebn dy t\u00eb ankes\u00ebs s\u00eb ZPS-s\u00eb.<\/p>\n
Po ashtu, paneli kishte hedhur posht\u00eb edhe pik\u00ebn 3 t\u00eb ankes\u00ebs pasi si\u00e7 u konstatua m\u00eb lart\u00eb q\u00eb Fazli, Kilaj dhe Smakaj s\u2019kan\u00eb kryer vepr\u00ebn penale q\u00eb bie n\u00eb nenin 393 t\u00eb KPRK-s\u00eb, at\u00ebher\u00eb kan\u00eb th\u00ebn\u00eb se s\u2019ka gabime n\u00eb vler\u00ebsimin e gjyqtares n\u00eb lidhje me bashk\u00ebkryerjen sipas akuzave 9, 11 dhe 12 t\u00eb aktakuz\u00ebs s\u00eb paraqitur.<\/p>\n
Ndryshe, n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb rast Bashkim Smakaj, Fadil Fazliu dhe Isni Kilaj u arrestuan m\u00eb 5 dhjetor 2024 n\u00eb Kosov\u00eb dhe u transferuan n\u00eb objektin e paraburgimit n\u00eb DhSK, m\u00eb 6 dhjetor 2024 n\u00eb baz\u00eb t\u00eb aktakuz\u00ebs s\u00eb konfirmuar dhe fletarrestimeve t\u00eb l\u00ebshuara nga Haga.<\/p>\n
Nd\u00ebrsa, Tha\u00e7it i \u00ebsht\u00eb dor\u00ebzuar fletarrestimi n\u00eb objektin e paraburgimit n\u00eb Hag\u00eb m\u00eb 5 dhjetor 2024, gjithnj\u00eb sipas njoftimit t\u00eb DhSK-s\u00eb.<\/p>\n
Kurse, Hajredin Ku\u00e7it i \u00ebsht\u00eb dor\u00ebzuar aktakuza e konfirmuar dhe flet\u00ebthirrja p\u00ebr t\u2019u paraqitur para gjykat\u00ebses s\u00eb procedur\u00ebs paraprake p\u00ebr paraqitjen e par\u00eb, e cila u mbajt me 9 dhjetor.<\/p>\n
Sipas aktakuz\u00ebs, Tha\u00e7i individualisht dhe p\u00ebrmes veprimeve t\u00eb p\u00ebrbashk\u00ebta me grupet; Grupi Fazliu (Fadil Fazliu dhe Fahri Fazliu), Grupin Smakaj (Bashkim Smakaj, Blerim Shala dhe Artan Behrami) si dhe Grupin Kilaj (Isni Kilaj dhe VllaznimKryeziu), kan\u00eb ndjekur nj\u00eb model t\u00eb sjelljes p\u00ebr t\u00eb penguar personat zyrtar\u00eb n\u00eb kryerjen e detyrave zyrtare.<\/p>\n
N\u00eb aktakuz\u00eb thuhet se Tha\u00e7i ka udh\u00ebhequr dhe marr\u00eb pjes\u00eb n\u00eb k\u00ebto p\u00ebrpjekje p\u00ebrmes vizitave t\u00eb tij n\u00eb objektet e paraburgimit gjat\u00eb koh\u00ebs sa ishte i paraburgosur n\u00eb kuad\u00ebr t\u00eb gjykimit t\u00eb tij p\u00ebr krime lufte dhe krime kund\u00ebr njer\u00ebzimit.<\/p>\n
Aty thuhet se an\u00ebtar\u00ebt e Grupit Fazliu, Grupit Smakaj dhe Grupit Kilaj u koordinuan p\u00ebr t\u00eb ndikuar n\u00eb d\u00ebshmitar\u00ebt e ZPS-s\u00eb gjat\u00eb vizitave jo t\u00eb privilegjuara t\u00eb datave 2 korrik, 9 shtator dhe 6 tetor 2023.<\/p>\n
Si rrjedhoj\u00eb, ndaj Tha\u00e7it r\u00ebndojn\u00eb tri akuza p\u00ebr pengim t\u00eb personit zyrtar n\u00eb kryerjen e detyrave zyrtare, tri p\u00ebr shkelje t\u00eb fsheht\u00ebsis\u00eb s\u00eb procedur\u00ebs dhe kat\u00ebr akuza p\u00ebr mosbindje ndaj gjykat\u00ebs.<\/p>\n
Nd\u00ebrsa, Kilaj, Smakaj dhe Fazliu akuzohen p\u00ebr tentativ\u00eb t\u00eb pengimit t\u00eb personave zyrtar\u00eb n\u00eb kryerjen e detyrave zyrtare dhe mosbindje ndaj gjykat\u00ebs. Kurse, Ku\u00e7i i ka dy akuza p\u00ebr mosbindje ndaj gjykat\u00ebs. \/Betimip\u00ebrDrejt\u00ebsi<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gjykata e Apelit e Dhomave t\u00eb Specializuara t\u00eb Kosov\u00ebs (DhSK) n\u00eb Hag\u00eb ka aprovuar pjes\u00ebrisht ankes\u00ebn e Prokuroris\u00eb ndaj vendimit p\u00ebr konfirmimin e aktakuz\u00ebs n\u00eb rastin ndaj Hashim Tha\u00e7it, Bashkim Smakajt, Isni Kilat, Fadil Fazliut dhe Hajredin Ku\u00e7it. Nga kat\u00ebr pika t\u00eb ankes\u00ebs s\u00eb ZPS-s\u00eb u pranua vet\u00ebm ajo q\u00eb kishte t\u00eb b\u00ebnte me p\u00ebrgjegj\u00ebsin\u00eb […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":200088,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-200087","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-lajme"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/radiostargjilan.com\/web\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/200087","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/radiostargjilan.com\/web\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/radiostargjilan.com\/web\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/radiostargjilan.com\/web\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/radiostargjilan.com\/web\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=200087"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/radiostargjilan.com\/web\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/200087\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/radiostargjilan.com\/web\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/200088"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/radiostargjilan.com\/web\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=200087"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/radiostargjilan.com\/web\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=200087"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/radiostargjilan.com\/web\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=200087"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}