Appeals filed against verdict for lawyer Vasvija Vidović, defense seeks acquittal or retrial

(Patria) - The State Prosecutor's Office has requested a harsher sentence for lawyer Vasvija Vidović in its appeal, who was sentenced to one year in prison in the first-instance verdict for obstruction of evidence, while the Defense proposed an acquittal or a retrial.

Prosecutor Bojana Jolović stated that the Prosecutor's Office of BiH filed an appeal due to the severity of the sentence and the decision on security measures.

“Considering that the Prosecutor’s Office has thoroughly explained in the written appeal, I fully stand by the subject appeal and the written proposal and response to the appeal,” Jolović said.

In early February, Vidović was convicted of obstruction of evidence for hiding the mobile phone of the suspended President of the Court of BiH, Ranko Debevec, who was arrested in December 2023 for abuse of office.

According to the non-final verdict, on December 18, 2023, Debevec, after being arrested on suspicion of abuse of office and forgery of an official document, called Vidović to represent him as his defense attorney, and in a separate room of the State Investigation and Protection Agency (SIPA), took a mobile phone out of his bag and offered it to her. Debevec's trial has not yet begun after the indictment was confirmed.

Lawyer Senka Nožica stated that the Prosecutor's appeal is entirely unfounded and that it claims the Court overestimated mitigating circumstances and did not consider intent and persistence. Nožica believes that the Court did not take mitigating circumstances into account and that the sentence is too harsh in itself.

As she said, the described act does not constitute a criminal offense, which means the Court violated the law. For the criminal offense of “obstruction of evidence,” as she explained, there must have been a court proceeding.

“The Court does not address the fact that the mobile phone in question was not presented in this criminal proceeding, nor was the content of the phone presented (...) The verdict is incomprehensible and self-contradictory, and no reasons were given for the decisive facts,” she said.

Defense attorney Nina Karačić stated that authorized officials treated Vidović as a suspect before informing her and that she was arrested. As she said, Vidović had the status of a suspect much earlier, which is evident from witness testimonies.

“The defense emphasized that it was also an illegal search, as the written order was not read to the pre-trial judge (...) The phone was not presented in the courtroom as evidence, and therefore Vidović could not comment on that evidence,” Karačić added.

Edina Rešidović pointed out the fact that the search of a lawyer is considered a search to which the rules of searching a lawyer's office apply. During the search, according to her, the Bar Association was not informed, and its representative was not present.

It is clear, as she said, that there was no written order to seize items at the time of the incident for which Vidović is accused, adding that there was no direct intent.

“The defense proposes that the Appellate Division reject the Prosecutor's appeal in its entirety and accept the Defense's appeal, amend the verdict and acquit Vidović, or annul the verdict, repeat the trial, and issue an acquittal,” Rešidović stated.

The verdict on the appeal will be rendered within the legal deadline, writes Detektor.