Court spokesman Kresimir Devcic declined to say the reason for the delay of the publication, adding that this did not breach the two-day deadline in which the court had to decide on the part of the appeal referring to Glavas's detention.
The Court subsequently said on its web site that the ruling would be issued after it was forwarded to the parties in the proceedings.
Two days ago, the Zagreb County Prosecutor's Office lodged an appeal asking the repealing of Investigating Judge Zdenko Posavec's decision to suspend the investigation of Glavas and that the judge decide again about Glavas's release.
Posavec made the contentious decision on December 2 after a team of doctors concluded that Glavas, due to a medical condition deteriorated by a 37-day hunger strike, was unfit to follow the investigation against him launched in June for war crimes against civilians committed in Osijek in 1991.
According to the press, the Prosecutor's Office feels Judge Posavec significantly breached the Law on Criminal Procedure (ZKP) because he handed down his decision although Glavas had not undergone a medical checkup, which, according to the Office, means that there is no reliable medical documentation to corroborate the claim that Glavas is unfit to follow the investigation.
The Prosecutor's Office also feels that the judge should have taken into account the ZKP provision stipulating that a hearing will be held even though a defendant is unfit to follow it if he/she is responsible for being unfit.
The Prosecutor's Office also feels that a suspended investigation does not automatically mean release from detention and that a defendant should be released when the legal reasons because of which detention was set are no longer valid.
Glavas was placed in detention because of possible tampering with witnesses and the gravity of the crimes he was accused of, and the Office maintains that the situation has not changed.
If the Zagreb County Court confirmed the judge's decisions, they became final and can no longer be appealed. On the other hand, if the decisions were repealed and altered to Glavas's detriment, his lawyers will be entitled to appeal. The third possibility is that the Court ask the judge to re-examine his decision as suggested in part by the Prosecutor's Office.