Conviction of Safet Gjici and Alma Kaçi / The court's decision is clarified, who paid for the sexual act

2024-04-17 21:47:00, Aktualitet CNA

Conviction of Safet Gjici and Alma Kaçi / The court's decision is

The reasoned decision of the Court for Safet Gjicin and Alma K.

According to the investigation file, it appears that Alma Kaçi was paid by the citizen Abedin Oruçi, who asked him to perform the sexual act.

"The court assesses that in order to correctly conclude on the purpose of committing the sexual act as well as the identification of the persons involved, a complete analysis of evidence and evidence is needed.

From the analysis of the evidence, it is clear that in the first moments of the defendant Alma Kaçi going to the office of the defendant Safet Gjici and all the time in her communications, the citizen Abedin Oruçi is directly interested.

The court, from a careful and complete analysis of the evidence and clues, creates the conviction that the defendant Alma Kaçi performed a sexual service against the payment made by the citizen Abedin Oruçi", it is stated among other things in the file.

Decision of the Court

The court, after examining the evidence obtained during the preliminary investigation phase, which was evaluated according to the rules of the summary trial, as well as evaluating the authenticity and probative power of each of them, creates the conviction beyond any reasonable doubt regarding the guilt of the defendants Safet Gjici and Alma Kaçi.

During the trial, it was proved beyond any reasonable doubt that on 06.06.2023 in the office of the Mayor of Kuka (Safet Gjici, the defendant in this trial), a sexual act took place between him and the defendant Alma Kaçi. The video which reflected the sexual act that took place in the office of the Mayor of Kuka has been published online in various media/portals, and on this basis the Special Prosecutor's Office has registered criminal proceedings no. 145/2023 against the citizen Safet Gjic (former Mayor of Kuka) regarding the criminal offense "Abuse of duty" provided for by Article 248 of the Criminal Code. On 22.06.2023, the Special Prosecutor's Office ordered: 1. Correction of the criminal offense within the framework of criminal proceedings no. 145/ 2023 from the criminal offense of "Abuse of duty", provided by article 248 of the Criminal Code, to those of "Passive corruption of high state officials or local elected officials" provided for by article 260 of the Criminal Code in charge of the person under investigation Safet Gjici and "Active corruption of high state officials or local elected officials" provided for by Article 245 of the Criminal Code, in charge of the person under investigation Alma Kaçi...

At the end of the investigations, the defendant Safet Gjici was brought to trial and his guilty plea was requested for the criminal offense "Passive corruption of high state officials or local elected officials" provided for by Article 260 of the Criminal Code. While the defendant Alma Kaçi has been brought for trial and her guilty plea was requested regarding the criminal offense "Active corruption of high state officials or local elected officials" provided for by Article 245 of the Criminal Code.

Article 245 of the Criminal Code provides "Promising, proposing or giving, directly or indirectly, any improper benefit, to high state officials or local elected officials, for oneself or for other persons to perform or not perform an action, which is related to his duty or function, shall be punished with imprisonment from one to five years".

Article 260 of the Criminal Code provides "Soliciting or receiving, directly or indirectly, any kind of irregular benefit or such promise, for oneself or for other persons, or accepting an offer or promise that comes from irregular benefit, by the high state functionary or local elected official, to perform or not perform an action related to his duty or function, shall be punished with imprisonment from four to twelve years".

In the sense of the aforementioned legal provisions (Articles 245 and 260 of the Criminal Code) that the actions of the defendants Safet Gjici/Alma Kaçi are classified as active/passive corruption of high state officials or local elected officials must be proven beyond any doubt reasonably that the active subject (defendant Alma Kaçi) has promised, proposed or given, directly or indirectly, any irregular benefit to high state officials or local elected officials and the latter passive subject (defendant Safet Gjici) has requested or has received, directly or indirectly, any type of improper benefit or such promise, for himself or for other persons, or has accepted an offer or promise arising from improper benefit, to perform or refrain from performing an act that related to his task or function.

The prosecution body in its conclusions presents, among other things: "... The prosecution body creates the belief that the defendant Alma Kaçi is involved in a corrupt affair, also referring to the surveillance of the phone "Samsung Galaxy J4+", in her use, the fact is documented in the record of dated 17.06.2023, through which the fact is announced that, on 06.06.2023, he received an SMS from a number .... registered on the investigated woman's phone in the name "Kukës cabinet", with the text ... According to the statements of Granit Gjana, received on 21.06.2023, the fact is announced that this number belongs to him and this sms was sent by him to Alma Kaç, after the meeting on 06.06.2023 in the office of the Mayor of Kuka. The citizen Granit Gjana, with the duty of the deputy mayor of the municipality, is called by the defendant Gjici, who expressly tells the secretary: "granit, give me a task there to deal with the one who has the dog project".

Just as in the conversations between Safet Gjici, Alma Kaçi and Granit Gjana, the latter, in his statements, announces the facts that it was the mayor Safet Gjici who had asked him (Granit Gjana) to listen to Alma Kaçi's project and to guide them on the further steps for the realization of the project, for which he then left together with Alma Kaçi to his public office, where he continued the discussion on the project issues and on the further steps that would be followed from both sides. Granit Gjana claims that he suggested Alma Kaçi to send him the detailed project by email, sending him his email address for this purpose. He also claims that he has written to Alma Kaç on other occasions, to remind him that he was waiting for the project according to the mayor's order.

The overestimated evidence is consistent with the examination of the smartphone phone device used by Granit Gjana. The investigative action of the investigation documented in the record dated 22.06.2023, announces the facts that, in the telephone section, there is a telephone number registered under the name Alma Tafa, which belongs to the investigator Alma Kaçi. Meanwhile, in the message menu, Granit Gjana sent several messages to the phone number used by the investigated Alma Kaçi, but this number was not registered by name in the phone. Asked about the number, Granit Gjana claims that "Safet Gjici gave me this number so I could contact him".

From the content of the sms sent by Granit Gjana on 13.06.2023, at 08:39, "Write me at ....", and the answer dated 13.06.2023, from the user of the phone number ...., that: "to henen do vij ne Kukës", it seems that in order to achieve her goal of irregular profit, for which she gave sexual favors to the mayor, the defendant Alma Kaçi continues communication with the person charged by the defendant Safet Gjici, - as this the latter accepted the irregular benefit of the type of sexual favor offered by the investigated Kaçi, even after the date 06.06.2023.

And to complete the facts, Granit Gjana replies "Ok", "I am sending an email", "I am waiting for an email".

Documented in the minutes dated 20.06.2023, the examination of the documentation submitted by the defendant Alma Kaçi, referring to the project presented in the office of the deputy mayor of Kukës, Granit Gjana, announces the facts that such a project is related to homeless animals and aid humane that should be given, which is accompanied by a request from the "Help for Animals" association, signed by the project leader Vangjel Gjiknuri and collaborator Alma Kaçi. The request is also accompanied by several photos of a fenced shelter with several dogs present, a historical extract of the commercial register for the data of the subject "natural person" with the field of activity "help, food and shelter for abandoned animals", confirmation of a bank account in the name of the commercial entity, as well as a detailed project with the approximate costs needed for its realization.

As above, we estimate that in their entirety, the evidence provided during the judicial review of the criminal case with summary trial, are capable of proving beyond any reasonable doubt that the defendant Alma Kaçi is the person who offered/gave her benefits irregularities of the defendant Safet Gjici, and that the latter, after having benefited from her sexual favor, promised/agreed to help her by calling the deputy mayor of the municipality Granit Gjana, whom he ordered to examine her dog protection project and present it to further to the meeting of the municipal council...".

The court in the part of the circumstances of the fact reflects them as well as each of the evidence administered during the trial, describing also the data obtained from each evidence. In the following, in order to conclude correctly regarding the legal definition of the actions of the defendants Safet Gjici and Alma Kaçi, the evidence and the data obtained from them must be analyzed in relation to the law. Article 152 of the Criminal Code entitled "Evidence assessment" provides "1. No evidence has a value pre-determined by law. The court, after reviewing the evidence as a whole, assesses its authenticity and probative power, arguing the reasons relied upon to form its conviction. 2. The existence of a fact cannot be inferred from the indications unless they are relevant, accurate and consistent with each other. 3. Statements made by the co-defendant in the same criminal offense or by the person taken as a defendant in a proceeding related to it, are evaluated together with other evidence that confirms their authenticity".

Referring to the charge against the defendants and the attitude of the prosecuting body in the final investigations, it is deduced that it was concluded that the sexual act (the benefit of the defendant Safet Gjici-Mayor of the Kuka Municipality) was carried out against the provision of the dog project that he sought to receive from the Municipality Kukes, the defendant Alma Kaçi (eventual beneficiary of the project), thereby consuming the elements of the criminal offense of passive and active corruption of high state officials or local elected officials (Articles 260 and 245 of the Criminal Code).

The court, after analyzing the probative value of each of the administered evidences as well as the indications which are correct and consistent with each other, assesses that the real intention of the defendant Alma Kaçi was not to corrupt the Mayor of the Municipality Kukas, to the defendant Safet Gjici and specifically that through the sexual act with the latter he received the dog protection project from the Kukës Municipality. The court assesses that in order to conclude correctly on the purpose of committing the sexual act as well as the identification of the persons involved, a complete analysis of evidence and evidence is needed. From the analysis of the evidence, it is clear that in the first moments of the defendant Alma Kaçi going to the office of the defendant Safet Gjici and all the time in her communications, the citizen Abedin Oruçi is directly interested. The court, from a careful and complete analysis of evidence and clues, establishes the belief that the defendant Alma Kaçi performed a sexual service against the payment made by the citizen Abedin Oruçi.

It turns out that this sexual act was recorded by the defendant Alma Kaçi.

Specifically, from the examination documented with the aforementioned minutes, the first part is described, among other things, when the defendant Alma Kaçi enters the office of the defendant Safet Gjici and they greet each other, and the following is reflected:

A high volume audio and some whispers are heard in the background but it is not understood what is being said from minute 5 55 seconds to minute 10 01 seconds.

"RECO0003", opened with the Media Player program, the video lasts 10 minutes. The video shows the inscription dated 06/06/2023 15:59:27. This recording is the continuation of the video "RECO0002" in the 42nd second of the video, the citizen identified by us as Alma Kaçi takes the eavesdropping device which she raises by hand and at this moment the ceiling of the office is shown to us, then she directs it towards the table where the citizen Safet Gjici is noticed in intimate moments, a large work table can be identified, a sideboard with glass jugs where several books can be seen placed on this sideboard, at this moment the citizen Alma Kaçi approaches and the sexual act continues.

At minute 4 and 16 seconds after the sexual act has ended, citizen Alma Kaçi is seen standing next to citizen Safet Gjici, and the latter is wiping her face with a piece of paper.

A: Animal. It's okay, forgive me because the first time I was very bad.

Alma sits in front of the mayor Safet Gjici and has the listening device in her hand where the conversation follows as follows.

A: Laugh... what are you doing? Are you going to help me make a fence for the dogs or not.. Come on, I don't work here, let me come and rent a house here, I have two schools, the State will pay me, but you won't pay me.

S: Now you're going to go, I'm going to call the one who took the dog's job with me and I'm going to leave those leaves..

S: That's right, it passed with the decision of the council

A: I found all that land worth 400 thousand old used knitting needles

S: Well, that's not a problem anymore, the problem is, how are we going to carry out the procedure of taking all the dogs here and bringing them there and how is the preventive situation going?