|
|
 |
|
ANEM media update Reg. no. 253/99 IN THE NAME OF THE PEOPLE The District Court in Zajecar, in a panel including Court Chairman Radojica Nikolic as chairman of the panel and Judges Danilo Veljkovic and Milinko Jovanovic, as members of the panel, with minutes taken by Olivera Pesic in a criminal matter against the defendant Nebojsa Ristic, resident of Sokobanja, charged with a felony as defined in Article 218 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Serbia, deliberating on the appeal by the defence: lawyers Jovan Stevanovic, resident of Sokobanja, and Vladimir Domazet, resident of Nis, against the verdict of the Municipal Court in Sokobanja, reg. no. 48/99 of April 23, 1999, in a session of the panel held on June 6, 1999, and after hearing the testimony of Miodrag Stojanovic, the deputy district public prosecutor in Zajecar, has handed down the following VERDICT The appeals by the defence lawyers Jovan Stevanovic and Vladimir Domazet ARE DISMISSED as being without justification and the verdict reg. no. 48/99 ofApril 23, 1999, of the Municipal Court in Sokobanja IS UPHELD. JUSTIFICATION In the ruling of the Municipal Court in Sokobanja, reg. no. 48/99 of April 23, 1999, Nebojsa Ristic, resident of Sokobanja, was found guilty of the felony of disseminating false information as defined in Article 218 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Serbia and sentenced to one year's imprisonment, including the period in detention since April 13, 1999. The defendant is obliged to pay a fee of 300 dinars within fifteen days of the verdict taking effect. The defence, Jovan Stevanovic and Vladimir Domazet, appealed against the verdict within the given deadline, Stevanovic on all points apart from the decision on the awarding of court costs and Domazet on the grounds of substantial violation of the regulations of the criminal proceedings, falsely and incompletely established facts and breach of the Criminal Code with motions as in appeals. The deputy district public prosecutor in Zajecar lodged a statement reg. no. 163/99, moving that the court dismiss the appeals as being without justification and supported that motion during the session of the panel. The district court has examined the disputed verdict in the light of Article 376 of the Criminal Proceedings Act, has investigated all documents pertinent to this criminal procedure and has found, after weighing the arguments of the appeals, that The appeals are without justification. Domazet's dispute of the verdict in the first instance as substantially breaching the regulations on criminal proceedings, that the verdict is inconsistent with the reasons of the relevant facts and that these reasons are mutually contradictory, according to the details itemised in the appeal, is without justification as not being true. Stevanovic's appeal does not specify the way in which the criminal proceedings regulations were breached, and the District Court finds that the proceedings of first instance and the disputed verdict do not significantly breach any regulations of the criminal proceedings, which it observes as part of its official duty under Article 378, Paragraph 1, Item 1 of the Criminal Proceedings Act. Reiterating the defence from the principal hearing, the appeals dispute the verdict of the first instance with regard to the establishment of facts without establishing that the court of the first instance had wrongly evaluated the derived proofs, or had wrongly established that the defendant had committed the acts of which he was found guilty with intent to provoke dissatisfaction and unrest among citizens and subvert the enforcement of decisions and measures of state agencies, or the diminish the trust of citizens in such decisions and measures, thus, because the court of the first instance had, on the contrary, correctly assessed the derived evidence and provided adequate reasoning thereof, which this court fully accepts and finds that the facts were fully and correctly established. The appeals fails to specify the breach of the Criminal Code, apart from claiming that the acts of the defendant do not constitute a felony under Article 218 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Serbia; this court finds that the court of first instance applied the Criminal Code correctly to the correctly established facts when it found that the acts of the defendant include all elements of the felony of disseminating false information as defined in Article 218 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Serbia and that the defendant is criminally liable for that. Stevanovic's appeal with regard to the sentence is without justification as the court of first instance correctly evaluated the weight of the circumstances relevant to the determination of the punishment and rightly found that a sentence of one year's imprisonment is merited as it equals the gravity of the committed felony and the defendant's criminal liability and that the sentence would effect the purpose of the punishment as given in Articles 5 (2) and 33 of the Criminal Code of Yugoslavia. The appeal cites no single circumstance justifying the reduction of the sentence. On all these grounds, according to Article 384 of the Law on Criminal Procedure, the panel has ruled as above. Minutes Council Court
Chairman |
