Defence of Vasvija Vidović: Kajganić announced the indictment even before it was written, and there is none against Debevec!

(Patria) - After the Defence in its closing argument requested that attorney Vasvija Vidović, accused of obstructing evidence, i.e., hiding the phone of the suspended President of the State Court, be acquitted, the pronouncement of the non-final verdict has been scheduled for February 5, Detektor reports.

At the beginning of the closing argument, attorney Edina Rešidović immediately stated that the only proposal of the Defence is for the Court to render a verdict acquitting Vidović of the charges.

She stated that the Prosecution in its closing argument repeatedly declared what Vidović should have done, and proposed that the Prosecution “consult the Criminal Code before making any prosecutorial decisions.”

Rešidović stated that this case will be remembered for the fact that the indictment against Vidović was announced by the Chief Prosecutor before it was even written, and that it was delivered unredacted to the media, which is unusual.

The Defence stated, among other things, that the Prosecution did not prove the allegations in the indictment, and that in its closing argument it did not address the most important element of the criminal offense.

“The Prosecution had to prove that the actions of Vasvija Vidović were unlawful and that she must have been aware of that unlawfulness,” said Rešidović.

Vidović is accused of obstructing evidence. She is charged with hiding the mobile phone of the suspended President of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Ranko Debevec, who was arrested for abuse of position.

Rešidović said that Vidović, as Debevec's defense attorney, was not obliged to hand over the mobile phone, even if there had been a court order for seizure of items at that time.

According to her, the Prosecution was obliged to take into account the basic principles of the legal profession.

Defense attorney Senka Nožica said that the indictment does not indicate that there is a court case against Debevec in which the mobile phone could serve as evidence, emphasizing that for the elements of this criminal offense to be fulfilled, it is necessary that it concerns court proceedings.

In this regard, Nožica also referred to case law in the region.

“The Prosecution was in a great hurry to indict Vasvija Vidović, while against Ranko Debevec no indictment has been filed even today,” said Nožica, emphasizing that investigative actions are not criminal proceedings.

Nožica also addressed the mobile phone, explaining that the operative part of the indictment does not indicate that the phone has properties that would make it suitable for evidence. She added that the Prosecution did not prove that this phone serves as evidence in court proceedings, nor even that it contains any relevant information.

Attorney Nina Karačić Brković stated in her closing argument that the entire proceedings were marked by unlawful conduct by the State Investigation and Protection Agency (SIPA) and the Prosecutor's Office of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

“Numerous illegalities have already led to catastrophic consequences,” said Karačić Brković, adding that this refers, among other things, to the arrest and unlawful detention of Vidović.

She addressed the failures during Debevec's arrest, posing the question: “How did he, already deprived of liberty, have a phone?” as well as the unlawful interrogation of attorney Vidović.

Karačić Brković stated that SIPA officers failed to take a series of actions during Vidović's arrest, who at the time of pulling the bag with the phone through the scanner was still not deprived of liberty.

The Defence also addressed the search of the accused's bag, stating that they consider pulling it through the scanner to constitute a search. This was undertaken, as stated, without a court order and notification to the competent bar association, as well as without the presence of a bar association representative.

“It is clear that the provisions for searching a law office must apply to the search of an attorney's bag,” said Karačić Brković.

The Defence proposed that Vidović be acquitted because the actions do not constitute a criminal offense, or that she be acquitted because the Prosecution did not prove the allegations in the indictment.

Judge Miroslav Janjić noted that the trial was concluded and scheduled the pronouncement of the verdict for February 5.