Untitled

Podujevo 1999 – Beyond Reasonable Doubtsince he was charged with the act of murder. We can conclude from his defencethat he did not have a lawyer.Then, the Secretariat of Interior Inspectors were present during the first interrogationof the defendant before the investigative judge and accordingto the law they were forbidden to attend the interrogation.Regarding the record from 18 July 2001, the defence underlines that it wasnot made according to the Criminal Procedure Code. The record itself doesnot contain information it should have. And I also raise objection becausethe original court documentation and the copy the defence received saysthat the last page of the record is four, which is not true because it is obviousthat the record has six pages. We underline that both records weremade with absolutely relevant violations of the criminal proceedings provisions.Regarding the second record, we underline that in the new proceedingsupon new Investigation Opening Request, the defendant had an attorney,who was not informed of the interrogation of the defendant in BijeloPolje, and the new Criminal Procedure Code prescribes the mandatorydefence during the first examination - interrogation.In this phase of the proceedings, the defence counsel has the followingproposition:I believe that the legal prerequisites for the termination of detention againstdefendant Saša Cvjetan have been created and in that sense we proposethat the court brings a ruling by which the detention would be terminated.Pursuant to Article 141 Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Procedure Code thedetention will be established against a person for whom there is reasonabledoubt that he/she committed a crime for which 20 or more years of imprisonmentis prescribed. If the circumstances point to the fact that a morelenient punishment could be proclaimed, the same legal provision gives apossibility not to establish detention.Defendant Cvjetan spent a long time in detention and he was looking forwardto this hearing and the court could conclude that from his defence.He will make a promise that he would not leave a place designated as hisresidence, that he would respond to each summons, and that he would notleave the area without the court’s permission. As for the investigation itself,the evidence was adduced a long time ago or was not adduced at all, so73