English - Eulex

This case involved four Kosovo Albanians charged with attempted aggravated murder. As described above,
the trial was originally dealt with by a local panel. However, following a request from the local presiding
judge, the President of the Assembly of EULEX Judges assigned two EULEX judges to the case.
On 20 November, a trial panel of Pristina DC composed of two EULEX judges and a Kosovo judge found
two of the defendants guilty of attempted aggravated murder in co-perpetration and of unauthorized
ownership, control, possession and use of weapons. In relation to the same criminal acts the fourth
defendant was found not guilty and was therefore acquitted. The three defendants found guilty received
prison sentences of 16 years, 20 years, and 15 years and 6 months.
Prizren DC
Selman Bogiqi et alia (primary/exclusive competence)
The case involved as defendants a Kosovo judge and two other court officials - one of the defendants
was an accountant at Pristina DC, the second worked in the civil registry at the same DC, while the third
was a judge in Pristina DC. The first and second defendants had been suspended and the third defendant
resigned.
All three defendants were charged with disclosing official secrets between 13 August 2007 and 24 August
2007, on 3 September 2007 and on 7 April 2008 in Pristina Municipality, contrary to Article 347 par. 1 of the
CCK.
By way of background, on 26 July 2007 the SPRK issued a ruling initiating investigations against three
defendants for the criminal offences of abuse of official duty or position. The investigation was given a secret
number (“SEC” number) as the data was assessed as highly sensitive and not to be publicly revealed.
The Prosecution alleged that Selman Bogiqi and the other two court officials had informed the suspects of
the above investigation initiated on 26 July 2007. The prosecution case was that information contained in
a file that had been designated a “SEC” case was an official secret within the meaning of Article 347 of the
CCK. All three defendants were charged with one count of disclosing official secrets in the period 13 to 24
August 2007, on 3 September 2007 and on 7 April 2008 in Pristina Municipality under Article 347 par. 1 of
the CCK, and punishable by imprisonment of up to three years.
The specific allegations against the DC judge were that in the capacity of an official person, acting as
pre-trial judge of Pristina District Court in the above-mentioned criminal investigation intentionally and
without authorization, through phone conversations with one of the defendants, communicated and made
available to him detailed information about the investigation proceedings. This information constituted
an official secret, disclosure of which caused or might have caused detrimental consequences. Thus, the
defendant damaged the criminal proceedings against the defendants charged with receiving bribes.
The primary issue in this case was whether “SEC” cases were “official secrets” within the meaning of Article
347 of the CCK. The information or documentation to be included within the classification of an “official
secret” must be proclaimed as such by law, or other provision, or deemed through a decision of a competent
authority, itself issued on the basis of law, to be an official secret.
35