"I am under strong impression that the Trial Chamber wants to release those accused of the murder of Slavko Curuvija as it has led the process as if it did not want to do it, or was forced in advance to pass an acquittal decision”, Veran Matic, Chairman of the Commission for investigating the killings of journalists states.
Journalist: Perica Gunjic Source: Cenzolovka"I am under strong impression that the Trial Chamber wants to release those accused of the murder of Slavko Curuvija as it has led the process as if it did not want to do it, or was forced in advance to pass an acquittal decision”, Veran Matic, Chairman of the Commission for investigating the killings of journalists states.
Journalist: Perica Gunjic Source: CenzolovkaClose the entire text of the article here
|
Testimony of Dragan Kecman who provided those tapes as evidence and signed the indictment, was limited only to the details regarding its exclusion… It is absolutely inexplicable that the court finds irrelevant the testimony of the man who solved the murder of Slavko Curuvija and who is very well acquainted with it.
Practically, by this decision, the Trial Chamber assisted the defendants to, with the help of the internet, Viber, Vocap, Signal, Skype and other communication systems to agree on their defense, and possibly prepare repressive measures, intimidate witnesses, even the family of the victim, in order to bring the trial to an end to their own benefit, despite the evidence gathered.
In such cases, it is clear that the easiest verdict to be passed is acquittal, by compromising the evidence as it is being presented, while main witnesses will not be able to testify. I think this is one of the most important reasons why the process is so long.
The Trial Chamber has conducted this process very irrationally, a whole series of witnesses and hearings were repeated without a clear sense and a visible goal. Time was wasted on exhausting, irrelevant issues. The defense has been allowed an open obstruction of the process.
I am sorry that our profession, students of journalism, associations have not been more present at these trials, in order to fight for the right to justice when it comes to the most drastic forms of violence against journalists in the history of journalism in Serbia.
The latest NIN, in a text by Vuk Cvijic, presents several new details that indicate the investigation and the three-year trial for the murder of journalists and owner of Dnevni Telegraf and Evropljanin Slavko Ćuruvija is burdened by pressures, obstructions, attempts to discredit the witnesses. The fact is shocking that some intercepted conversations indicated that the murder of Dragan Kecman was also planned, an inspector who came to the key evidence in this case. Kecman, who experienced the fate of some who helped shed light on the murder of Curuvija - was in 2016, without a clear explanation, removed from the position of the head of the Directorate for Fight Against Organized Crime (UBPOK).
In the said text, NIN writes:
"In February 2006, in the Belgrade club Varadero in Makis, Crni and Kurak, who is now on the run, met with witness Slavisa Arsic, who immediately prior testified in connection with the murder of Curuvija to police inspector Dragan Kecman. Kurak then concluded: 'Kecman needs to be cooled off'."
In the recent testimony of Kecman before the trial chamber that is leading the trial against the four accused for the murder of Curuvija, during which a lengthy and unpleasant debate took place, even between members of the panel with this inspector (who was called only to speak about taking this evidence, although he may be the best connoisseur of this case), he said, among other things, that even a man who helped the police collect information from Mobtel (later Telenor) about where the accused were moving and who they spoke to during the murder, was later fired.
"Look's what you did to me, I had serious problems because of those cassettes, I was left jobless because I gave them to you then," Kecman recounted what he was told by the Mobtel employee, when he met him "poor and neglected" several years later.
According to Cenzolovka, this employee of Mobtel, who had the conscience and courage to help investigators in collecting the most important material evidence in this case, was the victim of a former RDB and UBPOK official, who knew how evidence was collected in the case of Curuvija. After retiring from the police he joined Telenor and was one of those who decided which Mobtel employees would continue to work in the new company. Only one man at the time did not get teansferred to the new company - the one who told the police where the evidence was.
These key evidence - tapes with data from base stations - have been the subject of discussion for almost two and a half months at the trial for the murder of Curuvija, since the Trial Chamber (Snezana Jovanovic, Dragan Milosevic, Vladimir Mesarovic) decided to exclude some of these tapes from the court files because they were allegedly taken illegally.
The Court of Appeal sent this decision back to be reexamined, stressing that the cassettes were seized lawfully, but the Trial Chamber refused again to classify them as evidence.
The Commission Investigating Murders of Journalists is following this trial closely - and several times it reacted due to the delays in the process or the releasing from the custody of the two accused, but this time expressed its concern about the course of the murder trial of Curuvija especially harshly - the process is called "shockingly slow" , while the Trial Chamber's decisions are characterized as "legally bizarre."
Commission President Veran Matic was asked whether, in the absence of the will to end the trial within a reasonable time, he sees some kind of obstruction of the process for a murder that took place almost 20 years ago.
Veran Matic: It is an absolutely inexplicable and unacceptable court practice that we have had the chance to observe in this process. There are completely unjustifiable explanations that there is no capacity when it comes to the courtrooms. What if the most important looting privatizations were really to be put on trial, if organized crime related to all the "mafias" that were broken up through investigative journalism were put on trial? How would the problem of courtroom capacity be solved them?
Why can't we be at least like Romania? There a very large number of "big fish" have been put on trial and convicted more effectively than any case in our country.
The Trial Chamber has conducted this process very irrationally, a whole series of witnesses and hearings were repeated without a clear sense and a visible goal. Time was wasted on exhausting, irrelevant issues. The defense has been allowed an open obstruction of the process.
The Commission for investigating the killings of journalists warned in a number of press releases about the inadmissible slowness of the process. In several reports, which were an obligation to the European Commission, the unacceptable slowness was emphasized, but nothing has changed for the better.
Cenzolovka: On the contrary, the Trial Chamber even replaced detention with house arrest for two of the defendants...
Matic: The slowness has led to a strong counter-attack by the defendants and lawyers. Despite the fact that the Miroslav Kurak, accused of directly committing the murder, is on the run and that Serbia has not insisted on his arrest, the Trial Chamber makes an unthinkable decision to release persons accused for a serious crime of murder, two of the accused. This, in practice, means they will be free while mounting their defense, with the justification that the process has been going on too long. The fact that the process lasts too long is, above all, the responsibility of these same judges and the result of the work of the Trial Chamber.
Practically, by this decision, the Trial Chamber assisted the defendants to, with the help of the internet, Viber, Vocap, Signal, Skype and other communication systems to agree on their defense, and possibly prepare repressive measures, intimidate witnesses, even the family of the victim, in order to bring the trial to an end to their own benefit, despite the evidence gathered.
In such cases, it is clear that the easiest verdict to be passed is acquittal, by compromising the evidence as it is being presented, while main witnesses will not be able to testify. I think this is one of the most important reasons why the process is so long.
I am sorry that our profession, students of journalism, associations have not been more present at these trials, in order to fight for the right to justice when it comes to the most drastic forms of violence against journalists in the history of journalism in Serbia.
The fight against impunity should be the basis of any kind of action by journalists and organizations in order to act preventively today.
Cenzolovka: The discussion about the tapes taken from Mobtel took up more than two months, and they contained data on the movement and communication of the defendants several days prior and on the day of murder. But it is not over yet, despite the fact that Court of Appeal clearly stated that those are legally provided evidence…
Matic: The judge from the preliminary proceedings had accepted those tapes as evidence in this case. He confirmed the lawfulness in the process of its takeover and issued a warrant for its forensic expertise. So, Trial Chamber was fully acquainted with this evidence, including the tapes and the results of forensic expertise, which are among key evidence in this case.
In such cases, it is clear that the easiest verdict to be passed is acquittal, by compromising the evidence as it is being presented, while main witnesses will not be able to testify. I think this is one of the most important reasons why the process is so long.
In favor of the fact that Trial Chamber already has clearly defined intention that would result in acquittal speaks the fact that they practically made decisions opposite to the two judicial authorities which decisions they contest: judges in the preliminary procedure and Court of Appeal that annulled the decision of Trial Chamber presenting very convincing rationale. Despite this decision of the Court of Appeal, Trial Chamber repeats the decision on excluding tapes as key evidence.
We can only hope that that Court of Appeal will, after complaint of the prosecution, make decision that those tapes and the examination report still present relevant evidence in this case.
Cenzolovka: The Commission called such a decision of the Trial Chamber “bizarre”, while the attorney Slobodan Ruzic stated that he had never before witnessed the procedure in which this decision has been announced. How to explain such strange decisions being made in such a significant process?
Matic: I am under strong impression that the Trial Chamber wants to release those accused of the murder of Slavko Curuvija as it has led the process as if it did not want to do it, or was forced in advance to pass an acquittal decision. This is a rather sensitive case as it relates to the drastic act against the freedom of the media, execution of journalist and publisher in the state of emergency, exerting direct influence on the political circumstances, with obvious orders from the state leadership. A series of unresolved political murders took place during the nineties and after October 5, 2000.
Trial Chamber makes and inexplicable decision, although it is not familiar with the tapes’ content and with their forensic expertise, introduced in the process by the judge of the preliminary procedure. Carrying out evidence, when it comes to those tapes, was not carried out, while testimony of Dragan Kecman, who provided the tapes and signed the indictment, was limited only to giving details regarding their takeover, although this witness could have largely contributed to resolving all the open issues that were systematically clouding in this process. It is absolutely unacceptable that court finds irrelevant the testimony of the man who solved Curuvija murder case, having best insight into it.
Instead of the court showing resolve to open up possibilities for solving all those cases, it has demonstrated shutting up the space for resolving those cases, which in turn, thanks to our weak judicial system, sends messages that are discouraging for the investigative bodies and prosecution and the police, to keep working on those cases that is necessary in order to fight impunity, showing clear determination of the system to fight all those who committed political murders.
Trial Chamber obviously “wastes time” in this process, mystifying some simple decisions, turning the days envisaged for carrying out evidence into the days that bring decisions that makes room for the acquittal of the defendants, thus compromising the indictment despite clear decisions of the Court of Appeal.
Cenzolovka: Such decision has been reached after highly unusual interrogation of Dragan Kecman, the inspector who greatly contributed to gathering evidence in this case. As you can see, his testimony aroused most unpleasant discussions between the members of the Trial Chamber and defense attorneys. Finally, his claims that he obtained evidence in a legal way obviously were not accepted.
Matic: I believe that this case is very symptomatic: Inspector Kecman worked for the longest period of time on the Curuvija murder case. He obtained evidence legally, which he proved during his testimony, limited only to the procedures of obtaining this evidence. It is not possible to explain the decision of Trial Chamber differently after such a testimony and such evidence, but as showing bias produced under direct impact of the defendants.
The fact that Trial Chamber hadn’t interrogated the representative of the government that is best acquainted with this case prior to summer holidays, and who signed the indictment, clearly speaks about the desire to eliminate him from the process of presenting evidence. Why they needed three years in order to call him to give his statement?
His testimony is narrowed to the question which is already answered in the records of the indictment that was accepted by the same Trial Chamber, and that is: under which article of the law the tapes were obtained. It is Article 82, which was evidenced and submitted in the indictment, and the witness confirmed it.
All of this happens after the decision of the Court of Appeal that DLT tapes were confiscated in a lawful manner. Even if this confirmation was not issued, an official officer had confiscated the tapes, by performing professional act in this case, as the tapes presented vital evidence in case of brutal murder – execution of the journalist and publisher Curuvija.
What else should an officer do when he finds evidence on murder case, but to confiscate/obtain this evidence? Major witness in this case is being interrogated only by being posed a question evident in the records, not allowing main findings to be presented publicly, within court procedure.
Instead of encouraging professionalism and ethics demonstrated by inspector Dragan Kecman, such decisions and attitude of some of the Trial Chamber members, as well as judge Milosevic, member of the Trial Chamber, who entered into a sharp and unpleasant, partly improper polemics with the witness, additionally undermining the professional aspect of his work. Finally, his claim that he obtained evidence in a legal manner was confirmed by the Court of Appel.
Cenzolovka: Commission had expressed deep concern last year when the two of the accused were released from prison, while some of the participants of the procedure suspected that this is an introduction to acquittal. It seems that today you are even more concerned that this might happen?
Matic: Back then, it seemed as an introduction to acquittal, and now such decisions obviously present its implementation.
There are no comments for this document.