Miletic Defense Asks for Removal of Court-Ordered Protection Measures for Witnesses

According to the charges, state court judge Azra Miletic accepted a bribe from indictees Senad Sabic and Ramo Brkic. The prosecution alleges that Sabic and Brkic, who were facing organized crime charges, bribed Miletic in order to influence the outcome of a second instance proceeding against them.

Upon the request of the defense, presiding judge Minka Kreho scheduled a hearing to allow the defense to present their arguments for removing protection measures granted to three state prosecution witnesses on May 22, 2015.

Prosecutor Dzermin Pasic said the protective measures were granted to certain witnesses because they felt their testimony in this “sensitive and serious” case could jeopardize their safety.

The defense said there were no legal grounds to order protection measures, because there was no evidence of threats or pressure on the part of the defendants or a reasonable sense of fear for the witnesses.

“They are afraid of themselves and their actions and not at all of defendant or the people who are sitting here…The court and the prosecutor didn’t specify any reason that justifies the adoption of these measures. All witnesses could get protection protection measures this way,” said Edina Residovic, Azra Miletic’s defense attorney.

Residovic said it was obvious that a protected witness known as S-1, whom the chief prosecutor had granted immunity from prosecution, sought to hide himself from the public in order to cover up his actions.

Husein Music, Senad Sabic’s defense attorney, also said the prosecution didn’t want to expose S-1 to the public because of his actions.

Prosecutor Pasic said that during the trial the defense would be able to discredit the witness. He expressed his disapproval with the day’s proceedings, which he said weren’t connected to the aim of the hearing.

“The defense’s argument is that it needs names, because up until now the public has been used to apply pressure,” Pasic said. He added that the contact information of certain witnesses and the defendants were documented.

Regarding to allegations about her public appearances, Azra Miletic said she felt like the media had lynched her because of the court’s actions.

“Regarding my contacts with witness S-2, that was before it was known that she would become a witness at all. My conversation didn’t contain a threat, rather anger that someone who you believe is your friend is not answering your phone calls,” Miletic said.

Miletic said court-ordered prohibited contact with witnesses implies threats, pressure and other forms of harassment. She said there was a lot of “educational material” available on this topic.

The court will come to a decision at a later stage.