The President of the Court of Appeal, Valon Totaj, in an interview for "Oath for Justice", said that corruption cases are among the most challenging for the judicial system, emphasizing that a large number of them end in acquittals.
According to him, these cases are complex and challenging, from the stage of treatment in the first instance court to decision-making in the highest instances.
"These cases are more challenging to decide and normally this is then projected into the issuance of that decision and the form of decision, namely the handling of the case by the first instance court," said Totaj.
He added that he could not go into detailed analysis of specific decisions, but emphasized that from what can be observed in practice, a large proportion of cases end in acquittals.
"It is truly seen that a large number of these cases that are more problematic have ended with acquittals," declared Totaj.
According to him, the Court of Appeal and the third instance have established a certain standard for the administration of evidence.
"The Court of Appeal, and I believe the third instance as well, has created a kind of standard for the administration of evidence and professional standards that remain close to these positions of theirs," he said.
Totaj added that prosecutors must consider the level of evidence required to pass the court's filter.
"Prosecutors at the relevant levels certainly know how evidence should be administered or what the factual situation is that must reach a certain level of credibility in order to then pass the court's filter," he said.
According to him, reports from the most credible institutions, both external and internal, ascertain this situation and cannot remain silent, saying that it is good, since most cases end with acquittals.
He said that it remains a matter of discussion where responsibility lies for these results.
"Now, is the police to blame, is the prosecution to blame, or is it the court of first or second instance, it is an issue that needs to be debated and discussed," declared Totaj.
Commenting on the concerns raised by the Kosovo Law Institute (KLI) regarding the quality of reasoning in judicial decisions, Totaj said that this issue is mostly related to the decisions of first instance courts.
"I believe that this mostly targets first instance court decisions, because realistically there the reasoning is expected to be more professional and comprehensive," he said.
However, he acknowledged that the Court of Appeals also has an obligation to ensure that its decisions are justified according to legal standards.
"Of course, the Court of Appeals in certain cases has its own obligation to justify its decisions in the form and standard required," Totaj emphasized.
He added that there is room for improvement in this regard at all levels of the judiciary.
"Just like in the first instance courts, there is room for improvement in the second instance court," he said.
Totaj emphasized that the most important part of the court decision is the reasoning.
"The operative part may have two or three lines, but why that operative part was reached must be answered in the reasoning part," he stated.
According to him, various factors, such as the experience and professional training of judges, also influence this process. He said that it is important that the reasoning behind decisions is clear not only for the judges, but also for the public and the parties to the proceedings.
"When a case is returned for reconsideration, it is addressed not only to the judge, but also to the public. It is necessary to understand why a case has been returned for reconsideration and what should be done next," Totaj concluded.
Totaj said that there are cases when the decision is overturned by the Appeal not for the reasoning part but for its very structure, which is not according to the law. In this regard, he said that more training should be held by the Academy of Justice.
For more, follow the full interview with the President of the Court of Appeal, Valon Totaj, on the online platforms of "Oath for Justice".
t7 live
