The Court of Appeal has upheld the acquittal of Izmir Sakica, Samul Trashani and Alind Kajoshi on the charge of “illegal possession of weapons,” while changing the first-instance ruling on the two other charges by applying amnesty. The decision closes another part of the case, even though the Shkodra Prosecution had sought a heavy sentence for all three.
What the Appeals Court decided
According to the ruling announced, the Appeals Court upheld what the Shkodra Court had previously decided in declaring the three defendants not guilty in relation to the criminal offense of “illegal possession of weapons.”
For the two other criminal offenses, the panel changed the first-instance decision and ordered the application of amnesty.
Partial change to the first-instance ruling
The Appeals Court ruling does not entirely overturn the conclusion of the lower court, but modifies it only in the part related to the two other charges. In essence, the court left untouched the acquittal on the weapons charge, while closing the two other episodes through amnesty.
This procedural distinction carries legal weight, as one part of the case is closed with an acquittal, while the other part is closed not through a ruling on the merits of guilt, but through the effect of amnesty.
The request of the Shkodra Prosecution
In this process, the Shkodra Prosecution had requested that Izmir Sakica, Samul Trashani and Alind Kajoshi be sentenced to a total of 24 years in prison.
The Appeals Court ruling shows that the prosecution’s request was not accepted in the form sought by the prosecution, at least for the part related to this stage of the trial.
The case once again highlights the difference between the prosecution’s claims and the filter imposed by the court at different levels.
For now, what remains in force is the acquittal on the charge of illegal possession of weapons and the application of amnesty for the two other charges.