25.6 C
Skopje
Wednesday, July 15, 2026
Home Macedonia Court acquits ex-PM Gruevski in VMRO-DPMNE HQ case

Court acquits ex-PM Gruevski in VMRO-DPMNE HQ case

Judge Daniela Aleksovska, when announcing the verdict, pointed out that the case had to take into account the amendments to the Criminal Code in 2023, due to which the first-instance verdict was previously overturned

0
4

The Skopje Basic Criminal Court acquitted former Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski in the “Talir 2” case, which concerns the construction of the VMRO-DPMNE party headquarters.

Judge Daniela Aleksovska, when announcing the verdict, pointed out that the case had to take into account the amendments to the Criminal Code in 2023, due to which the first-instance verdict was previously overturned.

“Although amendments were made to the indictment, there were no changes in the evidence and facts presented before the court. The court considers that the prosecution did not prove beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant Nikola Gruevski committed an abuse of office,” Aleksovska said.

In this situation, the Court, the judge pointed out, fully accepted the position of the Appellate Court, which is that the amendments to the Criminal Code are in direct favor of the defendant.

“The court would like to emphasize that each verdict sends a certain message to the general public. In the present case, the message is as follows: Such an acquittal is exclusively the result of the adoption of the Law on Amendments and Supplements to the Criminal Code in 2023, and as a direct consequence of which the first-instance verdict in this case was also overturned, as stated by the Skopje Court of Appeal in the second-instance decision in this case. The court will emphasize that, despite the fact that this verdict is completely different from the one previously adopted in this case, the analysis and assessment of the evidence, the established facts and the conclusions drawn by the court remained unchanged. Thus, in the presence of the same evidence, on the basis of which the court previously determined that the criminal act in question was committed by ‘abuse of official position and authority’, it considers that in the presence of the same evidence, it has not been proven beyond reasonable doubt that the act was committed by another type of actions, i.e. by ‘exceeding authority’ and ‘failing to perform official duty’,” Judge Aleksovska pointed out.