Suspicions of dealing with cases on behalf of judges

"Oath of Justice" brings you the research on how the lawyer Shemsije Sheholli demanded 25 thousand euros in bribes from her client on behalf of the members of the College of the Court of Appeal.

The audio-recording proves that the lawyer asked the party for 25 thousand euros to accept the decision of the Appeal

Besim Sopi, after more than a decade in the courts, was waiting for a final decision to release five flats in the "Mati 1" neighborhood in Pristina which had been sold to him without his permission.

In this case, the Foundation had decided in 2018. Five years after the Foundation had decided in his favor in 2023, the Appeal would also decide, confirming the decision of the first instance.

But, unlike the other parties involved in the case, who had accepted the Appeal decision taken on July 25, 2023, it was Besim Sopi who, although he had heard that there is a decision, had not accepted it.

Sopi says that the problem was the lawyer who had represented him in this case, Shemsije Sheholli.

"I have not yet accepted the decision of the Appeal. Ma boyke, I heard from these residents who were there in my apartments that they have taken the decision of the Appeal. And this tells me that they won't release the appeal without giving you the euros, the money without a week, the money you call the commission of judges, they won't release your appeal, and if you want to sell the apartments, sell them for 10%. I still refused. Tash let landa go according to the court. I don't even know those judges and I don't even know who they are. With a name, yes, in my life, I also have nights without, yes, how do I know which day it is", said Sopi

From an audio recording provided by the "Oath of Justice", which the party claims to have made on August 15, 2023, 21 days after the decision was made by the Appeal, during a meeting between Besim Sopi and lawyer Shemsije Sheholli, it is heard that this the last party was asking for 25 euros in order for him to accept the decision of the Appeal.

The 27-minute audio-recording shows how the lawyer tells Sopi that they cannot make the decision without fulfilling their obligations. This although the Appeal had decided and there was a decision.

"Besim Sopi... they called me a decision, the decision had gone to our people...

Lawyer Sheholli: It's gone to them, but they won't let us go without fulfilling the obligation..

Besim Sopi: (Not understood.)

Shemsije Sheholli: They thought that I know them, they thought about the decision, but they don't tell us that we need to go with an all-powerful, with an executable, that decision.

Besim Sopi: How long is this decision?

Shemsije Sheholli: This decision has a deadline of 15 days.

Besim Sopi: 15 days. I absolutely love it.

Shemsije Sheholli: Absolutely love them.

Besim Sopi tells the history of this conversation and his case in court.

Sopi, who lived for many years in England, was the owner of a plot of land in the Mati 1 neighborhood in Pristina. There, he would invest in apartments, where he would own some of them. He had an offer to sell 5 of them.

"Sopi: I was the owner of the land, my father left me that land, with a title deed with all of it.

Journalist: And you have 5 flats?

Sopi: They don't meet me anymore, but he sold me five beggars, but he didn't give me any money, and since I went to England, there were five families in each apartment. There are five apartments for a family, five for a family. I have a case in court since 2011 for 5 flats.

Sopi says that after returning from England, he tried to get in touch with the person who had sold his apartments to other people. But, since he had not come in contact with him, he decides to send the case to the Court. In this court process, he would engage lawyer Sheholli, for whom he claims that even at the beginning he had given her money to speed up the case.

"Well, a little bit of a procedure went by, she begged me for a second to speed up the case and threw it out of order in the court. You made them and I gave them to you. He begged me for 1000 euros, I gave it and he shot it in court and now the trial has started, but as if the court called me once three months, in four months the hearings were held. I pay the lawyer for each session. I am convinced that I have paid them from 300 to 1000 euros", he adds further.

Sopi says that he gave this amount of money and other money for sessions, but there is no evidence for this. But he thinks that the amount he paid of 1 euros for the lawyer influenced him to start proceedings in the Court.

"But now I know how many people go there, how late they are. Besides my wall, he begged for 1 euros and I gave it to him. I don't go for 3-4 months, I finished my training in Basic and now I continue to study in Basic. The court extended it somewhere for 12-13 years. The first time the judge didn't even tell me. He begged them for his property or for a cone, I don't know", said Sopi.

Regarding this claim of his, that the lawyer had asked him for money to speed up the case, the "Oath of Justice" asked the Basic Court in Pristina and the judge of the case Hasim Sogojeva, who is now a judge in the Special Chambers of the Supreme Court .

"First of all, the first question is for the Chamber of Advocates to answer, as for the second question, I remember that the dispute was about the sale and purchase of apartments and that the parties who bought apartments made several complaints about the delay of the case, but , the case was processed according to the order of counter-complaints", said judge Sogojeva, while the Basic Court in Pristina did not respond.

For the procedure started in 2012, the Basic Court in Prishtina would take a decision in November 2018, where Besim Sopi's request was approved and the defendants were forced to vacate their apartments within 15 days.

"10% to the judges", the lawyer tells the citizen that without giving the money they cannot get the Appeal decision

Citizen Besim Sopi had a civil case in court since 2012. In 2018, the Basic Court recognized his right to five apartments that were sold to him without his knowledge. For four years, he was waiting for the decision of the Court of Appeal. But although Apelit had made a decision in July 2023, he had not accepted this decision.

According to him, the problem was only the lawyer who represented him, Shemsije Sheholli.

"In the Appeal, he said it will take me longer, but I said to help in the Appeal as well. They waited for four years. I called him once, I said that I have been crying for so long. She called her lawyer what is this delay. Did he just laugh, he said, he said, "I'll go and look and inform." I, too, waited for her and went to her apartment, there was a coffee shop nearby, that coffee shop was called "T" and what do I know, in Breg do Diellill, near the "Ismail Qemaili" school, and she started with the market, she said that they should give it to her. to the commission of judges, to the jury, what do I know, where does that 10%, 10% of the apartments go. I also saw that something was wrong, I did not accept, I did not agree", said Sopi.

After this meeting, which the party claims happened with the lawyer, seeing that something was not going right, the second time, he had decided to record the conversation.

"When he called me again, I went to him again. I prepared well and recorded it. I recorded what she wanted from me and it started - I have the complete recording on CD of how she begged for my money insisting that she should give it to the judges in a week. Qaj group of judges, he told me by name and said he is the head of the group - Burim Shala i Peja said he is the main judge. He said it's not good, the son of the stone and the wood, and I always need 10% of the judges, so they gave it to them", said Sopi.

This conversation, according to the party, took place on August 15, 2023. The lawyer talks about "big words" which she says she gave.

Besim Sopi: Look Sheme... what you said, I'm still in a very difficult financial situation.

Shemsije Sheholli: Faith, I have to go tomorrow.

Besim Sopi: Nah nah, I'm only doing a little bit (unintelligible), because I don't have any...

Shemsije Sheholli: We don't make the decision because I gave him so many big words that we don't make the decision.

Besim Sopi: By God Sheme yes (unintelligible)...flats.

Shemsije Sheholli: If we can't, Besim, we can't take it now. Failed execution.

Besim Sopi: Hey Shema... he was just begging you for 10 thousand euros

Shemsije Sheholli: With myte mu...

Besim Sopi: Well...

Shemsije Sheholli: I believe you are different...

Besim Sopi: Oh god, at the moment I don't have any kurgjo oj Shemë.

Shemsije Sheholli: Faith, son of stone and wood, what do you want? Why don't I go at all tomorrow? That's how I found out, that I left tomorrow.

Besim Sopi: I understand that you said that I have some work to do, I'm going out, I'm talking to you, and you said that for today it's only 10.

Shemsije Sheholli: Yes.

Besim Sopi:...except for a 10 now 15 mas 2 weeks.

Shemsije Sheholli: That's right.

Besim Sopi: I didn't cry at all without waiting for the bride and groom.

In this conversation, the lawyer claims that she is writing with someone, in order to find out about, according to her, the postponement of the deadline to give this money.

Shemsije Sheholli: When Besim, who I am taking to him, I told him that I will be fine next month...

Besim Sopi:... As soon as possible.

Shemsije Sheholli: No, Besim, you should contact me for a word.

Besim Sopi: O Shema, when I have them in my pocket, by the grace of God, by the grace of God...

Shemsije Sheholli: A day or a week?

Besim Sopi: When I have them in my pocket...?

Shemsije Sheholli: No, am I talking about a day or a week?

Besim Sopi: Shema, for one day they can't come.

Shemsije Sheholli: Not for a day, I don't even know.

Besim Sopi: They don't care about the arrival. But write on the stone of the wood…

Shemsije Sheholli: Son of stone and wood Besim is the last...

Besim Sopi: Even paint the walls...

Shemsije Sheholli: Like that, like that.

The citizen says that the lawyer initially asked for €50 and later €25 for the judges

The lawyer of citizen Besim Sopi, Shemsije Sheholli, allegedly asked for money on behalf of the Appellate Judicial Panel, claiming that Sopi cannot make a decision on his case without fulfilling, according to her, "obligations" to the judges.

Although, at the time when this conversation between Sopi and the lawyer allegedly took place, Apeli had already decided on his case.

At the first meeting, Sopi says that the lawyer asked him for 50 thousand euros.

"You are begging me for 5 flats, there is 10%. As you calculated for me, you calculated 100 euros for each apartment, 50 euros and I did not accept it. Now he told me, he called me for the second time, he said I lowered the price a bit, to 25 thousand euros. "I didn't give him the money," says Sopi.

According to the audio-recorded conversation, 25 euros does not seem like much to the lawyer.

Besim Sopi: ... By God, aren't you taking it away from me, nal but your own, aren't you realizing that there are too many of them?

Shemsije Sheholli: No, by God, there are not many Besim, it always goes 10%. 10% would have a tax of 50 euros, because there are 5 apartments, there are 100 euros, 500, half.

This conversation goes further, when the lawyer alludes that I should give this money to the members of the Appellate Panel who had handled this case.

Shemsije Sheholli: About a week or so. This is not one judge, this is three.

Besim Sopi: Qeky i Peja (not well understood).

Shemsije Sheholli: I Peja, for a week. Is that so?

Besim Sopi: Watch for a week (not understood)

Shemsije Sheholli: Okay, for a week.

Besim Sopi: For one week, tell them, I am not saying any words of Besim, that when Besim says, I praise God.

Shemsije Sheholli: By God Besim must.

Besim Sopi: By God's grace. Apart from the stone and the wood, I also begged...

Shemsije Sheholli: The last one, it means a week.

Shemsije Sheholli: With court decisions, there are no hajgares.

Besim Sopi: No.

Shemsije Sheholli: Grab it, son of stone and wood.

Besim Sopi:... 25 thousand euros is a lot, whoever gives it to me, I take it, but whoever gives it to me.

Shemsije Sheholli: Take faith that God calls you, God calls you, God brings you.

"Yes, even with persistence, even saying without giving money to the judges, to us, ie. she and I, we are not given that decision, because it has to be given to the judges. Even one judge mentions him by name, Burim Shala, he is from Peja. Sometimes you tell me there are 5 judges, sometimes you tell me there are 3 judges. I don't even know the judges, I haven't seen them, I don't know who was with them, did they beg for money or not, I'm convinced that they didn't, but that's why they took the money ", says Sopi during the interview.

The lawyer claimed that the citizen could not receive the Appeal decision without giving money

For more than a decade in the court process, the citizen Besim Sopi was waiting for an Appeal decision in the case where he requested the return of five apartments that were sold to him without his permission.

On July 25, 2023, the Appeal had decided in his favor, confirming the decision of the Foundation. However, he did not accept this decision like the other parties involved in the case. This is because, as evidenced by an audio recording, which is claimed to have been made on August 15, 2023, Sopi's lawyer, Shemsije Sheholli, was asking for money on behalf of three judges of the Appeals College.

Further, lawyer Sheholli claims in the audio recording how the judges have faith in her.

Shemsije Sheholli: Besim, don't play games with me on this topic, you told me a week ago that I deleted the message... and they believe me that I never read it.

Besim Sopi: Yes, why is it necessary, the decision has been issued.

Shemsije Sheholli: They let them, because they have to vacate the apartments, and they don't let you, because you have nothing to do with the proposal for execution.

Besim Sopi: With bailiff.

Shemsije Sheholli: We need the decisions in hand, that the all-powerful boh, we need the executable boh.

Besim Sopi:… ie. don't go there first... there's no chance, right?

Shemsije Sheholli: There's no chance, are they really loving it? No chance.

Besim Sopi: I'm not telling the truth, I'm saying help.

Shemsije Sheholli: I've helped you a lot, I've helped you for half, you've...for half

Shemsije Sheholli: One week is too much, you said one week, even at the last second, everything changes.

Besim Sopi: Why?

Shemsije Sheholli: It changes everything, it's the last second, come on, calm down and say goodbye.

Lawyer Sheholli claims that she can exert influence on a case that has already been decided by the Appeal

The fact that the Court of Appeal decided on July 25, 2023, that is, almost a month since the alleged meeting took place, may be an indication that the lawyer was trying to show that she can influence a case that has already been decided.

Journalist: Mr. Besim, before you come to this, you made another meeting during the conversation. Did you believe at that time that you could not have made that decision without giving that money? How did you get the conviction from the conversation with him?

Sopi: She was categorical that I did not receive it, but I was convinced that I received it, that the court, whether you have a negative decision or a positive one, the court will give me the decision.

In order to confront this audio-recording, "Betimi per Drejësi" has asked the lawyer Shemsije Sheholli for an interview for a few days, but she has not responded to e-mails, phone calls or sent messages. The Oath for Justice team also went to the lawyer's office but she was not there, while the residents said that she is on medical leave.

The appeal in this case rejected the plaintiffs' complaints, confirming the decision of the Foundation.

The judges deny any claims by the lawyer who is heard demanding money on their behalf

Lawyer Shemisje Sheholli, from an audio-recording provided by the "Oath of Justice", is suspected of asking her client Besim Sopi for 25 euros on behalf of the Appellate Judicial Panel to receive the verdict in Sopi's case. The date of this recording is claimed to be August 15, 2023, almost a month after the Appeal had already decided on Sopi's case.

"Oath of Justice" has contacted the judges of the Appeal of this case, how they evaluate the fact that the lawyer had asked for money in their name and account.

The President of the Judicial Panel, Judge Burim Shala, said that the Code of Ethics does not allow him to comment.

However, he denied having spoken with the lawyer in question about accepting any amount of money.

"I have not seen the e-mail, I have no right to the media, but it was announced that the Judicial Council of Kosovo has issued an instruction, do you understand me, I am very sorry, the president of the Court returns the answers, I can only do one thing they said, none of the things you sent are correct, do you understand", said Shala over the phone.

The member of the judicial panel, Nehat Idrizi, said that if the lawyer did such a thing, she may have fallen into the criminal zone.

"Judge Idrizi: Yes, if he did this action, I am saying in a position, the assumptions he made, there is also a violation of the Code of Ethics, but maybe also in terms of the criminal area.

Journalist: Does the lawyer in question have any attempts or claims that exerted this influence on me?

Judge: No, I don't have anything to do with her... I don't have any contact with her either, I know her since she was a former judge years ago, I have no contact with her either" , said

The other member of the judging panel, Hunaida Pasuli, said that if the lawyer said such a thing, then they are fabrications.

"I have not had the opportunity to listen to the audio recording that you refer to in the e-mail below. If these things were said by the lawyer, I consider it an action that seriously damages the image of the court. Such a statement by the lawyer, (if true), I consider to be fiction and disrespect to the profession. The lawyer in question has never, during the years that I have been charged with the duties of a judge, talked with me about any specific case, outside of the court session", said Judge Pasuli.

"So, in cases where the lawyer has been authorized in a case, then the same claims related to the lawsuit or the response to the lawsuit, depending on which party she represented, she presented mainly during the court session and that while I was a judge in the court of the first degree", she added.

On the other hand, Sopi says that he did not give the money.

However, the lawyer says that he took the decision a few days after this meeting, when he informed the lawyer that he had recorded the conversation in which she asked for the money for the judicial body.

"I told her I have both a recording and a testimony for you, and I told her over the phone her words that she begged me for money and she gave me the decision"

On the other hand, the Court of Appeal said that their decision was also confirmed by the Supreme Court in February 2024.

"Regarding the decision of the Court of Appeal with number Ac.nr.1383/2019, dated 25.07.2023, issued by the panel composed of judges: Burim Shala - president of the panel and Hunaida Pasuli and Nehat Idrizi - members of the panel, we inform you that the said decision of our court has been validated/confirmed by the Supreme Court of Kosovo. Therefore, in this particular case and as long as the decision in question has been confirmed by the highest judicial instance in the country, we have nothing to declare about the mentioned claims of third parties", the answer states.

"The Republic of Kosovo is a democratic state with separate powers, where the independence of the judicial system is guaranteed by our Constitution. Anyone who thinks that in a judicial, administrative or criminal procedure, any alleged subjective legal-civil right has been violated, or any other right, has the right to address the relevant competent bodies and institutions", it is further stated in the answer to the Appeal.

After this decision, even his flats, which were sold without the right, have started to be vacated by the buyers.

For all of this, the party has not filed a complaint with the Kosovo Bar Association, however "Oath of Justice" has requested an interview with them to discuss how the Association acts in these cases and if the lawyer's actions contradict the Code of Ethics. However, until the publication of the show, he did not receive an answer.

Gzim Shala requests investigations by the Prosecutor's Office and the Chamber of Advocates against lawyer Sheholli

Gzim Shala, senior researcher at the Kosovo Institute of Justice (IKD), regarding the audio-recording where it is suspected that the lawyer Shemsije Sheholli demanded 25 thousand euros from her client Besim Sopi on behalf of the judges of the Appellate Judicial College, has said that the Prosecutor's Office should investigate the lawyer for attempting to "exercise influence".

"In the specific case, if this situation persists, then you raised the suspicion that we are dealing with the commission of the criminal offense of exercising influence. According to the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kosovo, any person who demands or accepts a certain amount, even if only the promise of a certain amount of money with the claims that he is able to exert an unfair influence on the official person, then he has committed there is a criminal offense. In this particular case, we have two situations where this is suspected to have happened; the first case is for speeding up the case and the second case is for making the decision and that in this situation we are definitely dealing with the suspicion of committing this criminal offense and the state prosecutor must conduct an investigation in this case", he said Saddle.

Shala said that in addition to the State Prosecutor, this situation also creates suspicion for disciplinary responsibility, which should be addressed by the Kosovo Bar Association, as such actions violate the integrity of the lawyer's profession and trust in the judiciary.

"In the specific case, if we look at the conversations and the content of the conversations, then we see that in some way, at least objectively from what is seen, there is an attempt to use the party's secularity and the party's ignorance regarding the procedures in order to request money in name of the trial body and even the Appellate panel, and then at the time when the decision had already been issued. In this situation, the use of the name of the judges asking for bribes on their behalf definitely settles the situation and this is also the reason that all these elements should require a holistic assessment by the state prosecutor to clarify whether we have to do with criminal liability in the specific case. "

He received 25 thousand euros through enforcement, initially he failed to receive them in the name of influencing the judges

Lawyer Shemsije Sheholli is suspected of having demanded 25 euros in bribes from her client, Besim Sopi, on behalf of members of the College of the Court of Appeal.

However, the story of the lawyer to get this money does not end there.

Lawyer Shemsije Sheholli, after failing to receive the amount of 25 euros, as claimed, trying to present herself as having the power to exert influence, she received this amount from the party in another way.

25 euros were withdrawn from Besim Sopi by the lawyer through the enforcement process, on the claims of a reward agreement.

The lawyer presented to the executor a contract for the performance of services and remuneration of the lawyer for his work. In this contract, it was stated that Besim Sopi agreed that if he wins the legal dispute, 10% of the total value of the dispute belongs to the lawyer.

"Never, we have not made any agreement, any reward. That she has the reward from the first day every session from 300, 500, 1000 euros she received. We don't have any agreement. He took about 20 euros from me, only in every session, even if I'm not speeding up the case, I'm taking it to the court faster", said Besim Sopi.

Sopi claims that even the signature on this contract was not his.

"This worries me too, since the bailiff took me with him, what do I know, maybe it has something to do with the bailiff, neither was it signed by us, nor was it notarized, notarized, the invoice that came there, remove, you didn't have a signature, nor a name, except that of the executor, you had a signature. I cut it now, I told the executors as soon as you could, you went to withdraw my money. How long have you been without the notarization, without me signing them, without me even signing the invoice?", he continued.

The value of this dispute, in the decision of the Foundation, was said to be 200 euros, so 10% of the reward should be 20 euros and not 25 euros.

Sopi, this enforcement was only notified when you noticed that the money was withdrawn from the bank account.

"I saw that it is not 25 thousand euros, I said where did it go, who took it from me?" I went and asked the bank and they found me who took it and I went and found the bailiff, I said for what reason, where did you go, why did you take the money from me. He said, you made an agreement with the lawyer to give her 10%, the lawyer said she won the case and I have the duty as executor to take the money", said Sopi.

This enforcement order was issued by private bailiff Isak Islami. In the documents of this execution, it can be seen that the lawyer issued an invoice to Sopi, but this invoice was never accepted by Sopi and did not even have his signature.

The lawyer took 25 euros from the citizen with a dubious enforcement procedure

25 euros were withdrawn from Besim Sopi by lawyer Shemsije Sheholli, through the enforcement process, on claims for a reward agreement. To which Sopi says it was never done.

This enforcement order was issued by private bailiff Isak Islami. In the documents of this execution, it can be seen that the lawyer issued an invoice to Sopi, but this invoice was never accepted by Sopi and did not even have his signature.

Islami, the executor, had sent the notice of this execution to Sopi, but the address was not found from the postal return. Thus, Sopi was never notified.

"Never, none, none. I was told with electricity, water, utility bills, something, call me, they came to me in that apartment, neither from that executor nor from Shema, nothing came to me from this lawyer. He said I called him you. You already know, why aren't they? When all the others arrive at that address, why doesn't yours arrive? Let me know.

Executor Islami had sent the executive order dated December 21, 2023 to Sopi through the post. On the return sheet of January 11, 2024, it was recorded as "Not found, incomplete" address.

After that, the private executor, on January 15, issued a notice or poster which would remain for 7 days until January 22, 2024. After this notice, on February 9, 2024, Sopi's money was withdrawn from the bank.

Sopi considers this executive order illegal, which is why he filed a complaint in court.

In the complaint, it is initially stated that the invoice presented as a reliable document was not delivered at all but was only presented as evidence. Although the lawyer had presented the letter of delivery of the registered mail, in the complaint it is stated that she had not presented the letter that the delivery was received.

"So the signature is the main condition that would prove that we are dealing with the receipt of an invoice)" it is stated in the complaint, adding that the document on which enforcement is allowed is not an indefeasible document.

The complaint also states that the enforcement after the posting was against the law.

According to them, the Law on Dispute Procedure, namely articles 110, 111 and 112, have provided that the document in question must be delivered personally to the party, the authorized person, any adult member of his family, or if the same is not found in apartment, to his neighbor if he agrees. If the mentioned persons without any legal reason refuse to receive the letter, the submitter must note the date, time and reason for the refusal, and in this way the communication can be considered legally carried out.

According to the complaint, since the address has not been found and is incomplete, then a temporary representative should be appointed and the posting should not be done, emphasizing that the posting on the notice boards can be done for legal entities but not physical persons as in this case.

Contacted by "Oath of Justice", the private bailiff, Isak Islami, said that since the case is in court, I cannot give an interview. However, he considers that the execution was legal.

"Journalist: How do you evaluate the claims of the party that the enforcement was impermissible

Isak Islami: Honorable, every party has the right to appeal, he has filed an appeal, the court decides, it means with his claims, every party has the right, he thinks it is so, it means he has filed an appeal, the matter is in court, this is...

Journalist: How did the enforcement procedure take place in this case, can you explain to us...

Isak Islami: According to us, everything means everything is fine, according to us, everything is fine, I mean, according to us, yes, he thinks, he thought differently, he filed a complaint, the court decides.

Journalist: Have you sent the notice according to the law, which is provided if he cannot accept it, send it to his family...

Isak Islami: All the procedures (Inaudible) and the enforcement procedure, I have another phone call, greetings...

Reporter: Can't I hear you pray one more time?

Isak Islami: According to us, it means that we respect the law based on the law that we acted.

"Oath for Justice" has also requested an interview from the President of the Chamber of Private Bailiffs, Isa Shala. He said that since the case is in court, he cannot make a statement about the case, but in a written answer he explained in principle how the enforcement happens for natural persons.

He said that in cases where enforcement is allowed and the enforcement order is submitted according to the Law on Dispute Procedure, which also applies to the enforcement procedure.

"Article 110.1 of the Civil Code stipulates that the lawsuit, the response to the lawsuit, the summons to the hearing, the payment order, the judgment and the ruling, against which a special appeal is allowed, the means of striking the decision, are delivered personally to the party, namely the legal representative or the representative with power of attorney hers. Other documents will be delivered personally to the addressee when such a thing is expressly provided for by this law or when the court concludes that because of the original documents that are attached to the document that must be delivered, or for any other reason, extra care is needed" , he said.

"Article 110.2 If the person to whom the document should be personally delivered is not found where delivery is to be made, the deliverer will be notified when and where he will be able to find this person and will allow him to any person specified in Article 111 paragraph 1 and 2 of this law, the written notice to receive the letter on the day and at the specified time at his residence, respectively at his place of work", he added.

"If, even after this, the deliverer of the letter does not find the person to whom the letter should be delivered, then he will act according to the provisions of Article 111 of this law, and thus the delivery will be considered completed", explained Shala further.

Further, he explained how if the person to whom the letter should be delivered is not found, then it is sent to a family member, and if they are not found either, it is given to the neighbor if he agrees.

He then explains that the document can be delivered to the person working with him if he agrees.

Shala: Investigation also against the bailiff, it is suspected that he did not follow the procedures when 25 thousand euros were taken from the citizen

Citizen Besim Sopi, 25 euros, was withdrawn from the lawyer Shemsije Sheholli, through the enforcement process, on the claims of a reward agreement. To which Sopi says it was never done.

Sopi, this enforcement was only notified when you noticed that the money was withdrawn from the bank account.

For issuing this enforcement order, the bailiff Isak Islami is said to have not followed a series of procedures provided by law.

In this regard, Gzim Shala, Senior Researcher at the Kosovo Institute for Justice (IKD), said that the bailiff should be investigated if he committed a violation in this case.

"It is the obligation of the executor, to first carry out, to execute the amount that is required to be carried out well on the other hand, and to protect the interests of the debtor party. In the specific case, if the person in question has not been found, it is the obligation of the executor to undertake all procedural actions to find the debtor in order to enable him to recover. In this particular case, from what we have in front of us, it is suspected that this did not happen, because it was simply passed from one action at the moment when the debtor was not found, it was passed to the next action, which is the posting, a provision was applied that is not applicable to citizens, natural persons, but it is applicable only to legal persons.

He said that in this particular case, the executor had to follow a series of actions defined in the Law on Dispute Procedure, to find the debtor so that he could challenge the enforcement order in court.

Shala added that the procedure followed by the private bailiff should also be the object of the investigation.

"As well as the bodies that hold the executors responsible to carry out an investigation if in this particular case we were dealing with a violation. It should be borne in mind that the enforcement method and procedure must not become an object of legal uncertainty for citizens who understand about an enforcement procedure only when the enforcement order is executed.

The IKD researcher has also mentioned the fact that this enforcement order was made on the basis of a reward contract that said 10% of the court case, while it is much bigger.

"The contract says that it is about 10% of the total amount of the dispute, the total amount of the dispute is 200 thousand euros, which means that 10% of it is 20 thousand euros and that the invoice issued is 25 thousand euros beyond the contract is completely strange how this amount came to be, but also on the other hand, the fact that this 25 thousand euros is related to the amount requested on behalf of three judges and all these elements do not speak of a normal procedure and regular enforcement. And this is also the reason why it is up to the institutions to deal with all these issues and hold them accountable and inform the public about what happened in this situation", said Shala.

After this execution, Besim Sopi filed a criminal complaint with the Basic Prosecutor's Office in Pristina against the lawyer Shemsije Sheholli for the criminal offense of fraud and legalization of false content.

The Oath for Justice has asked the Basic Prosecutor's Office in Pristina to know at what stage of the procedure the case is.

"In the case you refer to, we inform you that until now, the prosecutor of the case has received a statement from the injured party, while in accordance with the provisions of the KPPRK, he is continuing with the treatment of the case in question", said in a written response, the spokesperson of the Basic Prosecution in Prishtina, Laureta Ulaj.

Lawyer Shemsisje Sheholli was previously a judge in the former Municipal Court in Pristina. In 2013, the State Prosecutor's Office filed an indictment against her for abuse of her official position as a judge.

In 2016, Sheholli was found guilty and sentenced to 3 months of effective imprisonment. The prosecution had appealed in the Appeal regarding the length of the sentence. Sheholli himself had complained in Apel.

The case was returned to reinstatement, but in 2017 the criminal case was prescribed. This is because the Court of Prizren had not managed to hold any session after the reinstatement, as Sheholli had continuously refused to participate in the sessions on the grounds that he was suffering from a serious illness.

Besim Sopi, who has lived for 30 years in England and has chosen to return and live in Kosovo, says that he has faith in the justice system that will solve this case.

"I am convinced, I am convinced that justice is not lost, it is delayed, it is delayed but it is not lost", said Sopi.

Besim Sopi says that he has not contacted the lawyer since she was not available, but he received a message from her.

"I sent him a message, he said, he returned the message "see you in court".