Untitled

Podujevo 1999 – Beyond Reasonable Doubtformity with the then effective provisions of the Criminal Code Procedureand, due to this, the appeals in this part are also unfounded because theassessment that the evidence was obtained in line with the law must befounded on the Procedure Code (i.e. Criminal Procedure Code) that wasapplicable at the time the evidence was obtained.On the occasion of the interrogation of the defendant in Bijelo Polje, theDefence Attorney was not present for real. However, by the amended InvestigationOpening Request the defendant was not charged with thecommission of criminal act pursuant to Article 47 Para 2 of the Republicof Serbia Criminal Code, which was, according to the then applicable law,punishable with the death penalty, but with the act pursuant to Article142 Para 1 of the FRY Criminal Code, which could not be punished by thedeath penalty. Therefore, according to the then applicable Criminal ProcedureCode, the crime he was interrogated about did not require the presenceof Defence Attorney.Finally, Attorney ore Mamula’s appeal allegation that the record madein the interrogation before the Investigative Judge should have been separatedbecause the defendant did not have an opportunity to choose hisown Defence Attorney, which is the right granted by the FRY ConstitutionalCharter on Human and Minority Rights and ratified international conventionsand general principles of International Law is also unfounded. Itwas found unfounded because his right to defence was not violated by appointingan ex officio Attorney instead of an Attorney of his choice since hewas supported by an expert, Attorney Dragutin Stanković. The Court managedto provide his support in the way described by Investigative JudgeBajović and which has already been mentioned. Besides this, this was happeningduring the time of war when certain freedoms and rights grantedby the Constitution were limited. This includes the possibility of appointingan ex officio Attorney instead of an Attorney of the defendant’s personalchoice. The limitation of these rights is in line with Articles 11 and 12 Para2 of the Republic of Serbia’s Constitution, Article 6 of the Charter on Humanand Minority Rights and Civil Freedoms, which prescribe that duringthe time of war or the state of emergency the State may take measures derogatingfrom human and minority rights to the extent strictly required bythe exigencies of the situation. Contrary to the appeals lodged, the applicationof these limitations is not in collision with international conventions343