Bans are lifted, while the victim fears

The Court of Appeal accepted Rožajec's appeal E. Š. (32) accused of raping his ex-wife, violence against her and abuse and canceled the measure by which their colleagues from the High Court forbade him to leave his place of residence, i.e. his hometown.

They sent the case back to that court for a new decision.

She was damaged and yesterday she told "Vijesti" that she was worried about such a decision, especially considering that her ex-husband threatened to kill her.

"No one passed a measure prohibiting him from leaving Rožaje for no reason, on the contrary, I think that after they heard the video of death threats, it was one of the ways to protect my life. On that video, he says, among other things, - 'When they investigate you, I will be taken to the police and I will jail you sweetly'. So, for someone who was persistent in abuse, who persistently repeated threats of murder, who raped me after we broke up, the smallest problem is a restraining order of less than 100 meters. The ban on leaving the place of residence protected me as much as possible, because I live in Podgorica, and he lives in Rožaje, so I hope that the judges who decide again will bear in mind that a different decision may result in it being too late for the reaction of the authorities in my case ", she told "Vijesti".

Her ex-husband was arrested at the beginning of April after the woman from Podgorica decided to report the rape and abuse. He stayed in the Investigation Prison for a short time, his detention was terminated on May 10, and three days later, acting on the appeal of the Higher Prosecutor's Office, he was forbidden to leave Rožaje.

Answering the questions of "Vijesti", the spokeswoman of the Court of Appeal, Judge Danijela Vukčević, said:

"The Court of Appeal of Montenegro decided on the appeal against the decision of the High Court in Podgorica Kv. no. 559/24 of 13 May 5, which changed the decision of the judge for the investigation of the High Court in Podgorica, in such a way that the defendant E. Š. a certain measure of supervision of the ban on leaving the residence. The Appellate Court of Montenegro, ruling on the appeal of the defendant's counsel, revoked the said decision and sent the case back to the first instance court for a new decision.

The judge also explained why they revoked the decision of their colleagues from the Higher Court in Podgorica.

"For a more complete understanding, we explain that previously, by the decision of the investigating judge of the High Court in Podgorica Kv. no. 166/24 of 10 May 5, at the suggestion of the defendant's counsel, and with the consent of the Higher State Prosecutor's Office in Podgorica, the defendant Š. his detention was terminated and that he was given a measure of supervision prohibiting him from accessing or meeting with certain persons - the injured party at a distance of less than 2024 meters below which the defendant must not approach the injured party, and he was warned that, if he violates the said measure, that he may be ordered against him custody. The Higher State Prosecutor's Office filed an appeal against that decision, and in the decision-making process on the filed appeal, the panel of the first-instance court, by decision Kv. no. 100/559 of May 24, 13, accepted the appeal and changed the decision of the investigating judge in such a way that, in addition to the aforementioned, the defendant was also ordered to forbid him from leaving his place of residence - the municipality of Rožaje, where the defendant resides. Deciding on the appeal, the Appellate Court of Montenegro assessed that the appeal was founded, canceled the first-instance decision and sent the case back to the first-instance court for a new decision. The reasons by which this court was guided are detailed in the decision. According to this court, the first-instance decision was made in serious violation of the provisions of the criminal procedure, because the reasons given by the first-instance court for its decision are unclear and incomplete, which is the reason why the first-instance decision had to be canceled. Bearing in mind your question, we consider it important to point out that the surveillance measure of banning access or meetings of the accused Š. with certain persons - the injured party at a distance of less than 5 meters below which the defendant must not approach the injured party and still in force", wrote the spokeswoman of the Court of Appeal in the answers.

Victim testimony

The ex-wife of the accused previously told "Vijesta" that she feared for her life, because the accused, after she left him, threatened to kill her.

At the beginning of April, she spoke in detail in front of the prosecutor about the hell she went through from April 2023 to the end of February this year.

She explained that, as she claims, she was beaten because she sits "wrongly", does not look at the floor when they pass by on the street, if she goes to work without his permission.

"In his house in ******** he beat and slapped me. My lip split from the blows. He held a gun to my head and then a knife to my throat. All this could be heard by his household. Then he locked me in the room so that I could not report him, nor go for an examination. In the evening, I asked him to take me to my friend's house in ****** ****, which he did. However, he stopped the car several times and beat me, pulled my hair. In what condition he brought me to my friend, she can testify," that woman told the prosecutor about the beatings she received while she was engaged to the now suspect.

Such testimonies were repeated in her statement, and among them is a confession about the beatings she received twenty days after entering into a Sharia marriage with a thirty-two-year-old man.

Then he broke her tooth, and the photos of the injuries, which she took and which "Vijesti" had access to, are terrifying.

According to the knowledge of "Vijesti" E. Š. denied guilt at the hearing in the prosecutor's office.

He did not admit that he beat her, nor that he forced her to have intimate relations against her will, after she decided to end her marriage with him.

After he was arrested and then taken to the Investigation Prison, his relatives started insulting the victim. They did this by dominantly commenting on the article "Vijesti" about the arrest of E. Š. which she reported.