Sentencing for Asim Sarajlić and others scheduled for February 10

(Patria) - The Cantonal Prosecutor's Office in Sarajevo, in its closing arguments at the trial for giving gifts and other benefits, requested a guilty verdict for Asim Sarajlić, Sabahudin Delalić, and Muhamed Šehović, while the defense proposed their acquittal.

Cantonal Prosecutor Lejla Kurtanović stated that the Prosecutor's Office, through the presented evidence, has fully proven that Sarajlić, Delalić, and Šehović committed the offense they are charged with.

She addressed the defense's objections, which during the proceedings highlighted that the audio recording used as evidence was illegal and that privacy rights were violated.

She stated that witness Velid Tvrtković, who made the recording, did not initiate the meeting with the accused himself, and therefore, secrecy is not violated if he records a conversation to which he was invited.

Kurtanović said that the witness, as a citizen, did not violate anyone's fundamental rights and recorded facts concerning him. She added that Tvrtković's statement indicates he did not know the meeting location or who would attend, and that he could not request permission to record or conduct investigative actions because he did not have time.

"Witness Velid Tvrtković did not know in advance that a criminal offense was being prepared," stated Kurtanović, adding that these were circumstances that could have caused the witness some concern, that the recording does not relate to the private lives of the interlocutors, and that the right to privacy can be delegated under certain conditions, and that there is no absolute prohibition of such evidence at the court level.

The prosecutor said that it was indisputably proven what the benefit for the accused entailed, and that witness Tvrtković was offered employment in public institutions for his wife during the meeting, which should have been carried out through public procedures, and that the authenticity of the recording itself was proven during the proceedings.

"We propose that the Court find Asim Sarajlić, Sabahudin Delalić, and Muhamed Šehović guilty and punish them according to the law," said Kurtanović, adding that a guilty verdict would restore citizens' trust in the judiciary.

Sarajlić, Delalić, and Šehović are accused of arranging a meeting with Tvrtković between February 20 and 25, 2020, through Šehović, before the scheduled internal party elections for the president of the SDA Sarajevo Cantonal Board, which were planned for February 26, 2020, and at which the proposed candidates were members Efendić and Prevljak.

According to the indictment, they promised Tvrtković that, by using their social and influential positions within the SDA, they would employ his wife in one of the institutions where SDA cadres hold leadership positions, if he cast his vote for their candidate for the aforementioned position – Prevljak – in those elections.

Sarajlić, according to the indictment, was a member of the Presidency, i.e., vice-president of the SDA at that time, Delalić was a member of the Executive Board of the SDA Novi Grad Sarajevo Municipal Organization, and Šehović was a former technical secretary of the party.

According to Sarajlić's defense attorney Nermin Mulalić, the closing arguments should not have even taken place, given that there were no grounds to issue an order for an investigation, nor to file and confirm an indictment.

Mulalić explained that it gives the impression that the Prosecutor's closing argument is actually a defense for Velid Tvrtković and Semir Efendić against the criminal offense of "illegal recording.".

"The illegality of that evidence is based on Velid Tvrtković's motives, which cannot fall within the scope of public interest," stated Mulalić, adding that upon inquiry by Šehović's defense, Tvrtković revealed the motive for recording the conversation – fear, and that Efendić testified that Tvrković told him he had "turned on his phone just in case.".

Sarajlić's defense stated that Tvrtković's motive was private and personal interest and recalled the "Potkivanje" case before the State Court, which determined that the recording in that case was illegal and that the circumstances in this case are identical.

This defense also claims that the Prosecutor's thesis – that Tvrtković has the status of a responsible person against whom a criminal offense can be committed – is unfounded, and highlighted a series of claims according to which the credibility of Efendić and Tvrtković as witnesses is questionable, as stated.

Kadrija Kolić, the defense attorney for the accused Delalić, stated that the Prosecutor's Office has not proven his client's guilt in this case and that all evidence presented by the Prosecutor's Office stems from the criminal act of "unauthorized recording.".

Kolić emphasized that all the Prosecutor's evidence originated from a criminal act and should be considered illegal because it was obtained in violation of the Criminal Procedure Code. He listed a series of pieces of evidence that should be considered illegal, which resulted from violations of human rights and freedoms.

"The legality of evidence collection is of crucial importance. (...) Since we do not have a decision authorizing the recording, our objection to its illegality is valid," said Kolić, adding that the recording served as the basis for obtaining all other evidence.

This defense also cited the "Potkivanje" case as an example, in which the audio recording was declared illegal because it was made against the knowledge and will of those present and in which the Court determined that the recording was obtained by violating citizens' right to privacy.

Nina Karačić, Šehović's defense attorney, stated during the closing arguments that the audio recording was not obtained under the conditions prescribed by law. She said that Tvrtković – without the consent of those present – recorded a conversation in a car that was not his private property, thereby violating the rights of others.

"Velid Tvrtković stated when asked by the defense that he made the recording out of personal fear. The motive was only personal fear, interest, not the satisfaction of public interest," stated defense attorney Karačić and asked the Court to consider that the recording is evidence on which all other evidence is based, which represents "the fruit of a poisonous tree.".

Šehović's defense stated that the Prosecutor's Office did not establish during the criminal proceedings that the voice on the recording belonged to Šehović, that the recording from the USB was clearly modified, and that witness Tvrtković deleted messages with the accused Šehović – which is evident from the evidence.

She added that this is an blatant example of a witness who cannot be trusted, and that the Prosecutor's Office did not present evidence indicating a prior agreement between the accused, as described in the indictment.

All three defense teams requested an acquittal for the accused.

The sentencing is scheduled for February 10, Detektor reports.