EULEX judges refer to the defendants as “on the four sides” (Video)

Days ago EULEX judges Chairman Malcolm Simmons resigned, accusing this mission of corruption and other relatives. Journalist Burim Gojuli has provided evidence that triggers doubts about the biggest European mission in Kosovo.

In some e-mail communications by British Malcolm Simmons with senior EU officials, the forms of justice sharing by EULEX judges, who defendants in the “Drenica”, are referred to as animals.

Furthermore, Simmons has said that verdicts in the “Drenica” and “Klekka” were aimed at continuing the Pristina-Belgrade dialogue. For more, we follow the research of the “show”, which will bring new evidence to this issue throughout the week.

Former Chairman of the European Mission for Rule Ending and Law Board of Kosovo Malcolm Simmons brought a lot of dust with his resignation and accusations made against EULEX.

British claims of corrupt relatives within the largest European mission in Pristina question EULEX's impartiality and credibility, especially in judicial processes.
The research editorship of the Roads show in RTK has managed to provide exclusive evidence, proving the abuses within this institution.

An email Simmons sent to the Chief of Operations in the European Union's Civil Planning and Conduct Administration, Kenneth Dean, is evidence of non-professionalism in sharing EULEX's justice mission.

The contents of this email are particularly about how the decision has been made to punish the accused in the Drenica 2 case.

In particular, in this email communication of Simmons with Kenneth Dean, serious charges were made at the address of the chief judge in Drenica 2, Darius Silicki. The Briton has reported to the senior EU official on the offensive and discriminating approach the chief judge had towards the defendants in the Drenica case. According to the email provided by RTK, he aimed at condemning this group by aiming for progress in its position.

“at the beginning of the Drenica court process 2, the presiding judge referred to the defendants as natural in Albanians. He said: “If I punish the defendants, I can get a job anywhere in the EU.” says on Simmons's email sent to the senior EU official.

These facts highlight yet another side of EULEX judges' decisions.

Simmons accuses the Mission of punishing Albanians, to please Serbia and push ahead the Pristina-Belgrade dialogue.

The “The Ristics of Drenica and Kletchka were vital to the Pristina-Belgrade dialogue. It became clear to me by the mission management that these cases were essential to ensuring Serbia's continued engagement in this process”, he has said.

This is not the only charge led by Malcolm Simmons towards Judge Darius Sielicki and EULEX. He cast claims that the Polish judge, in co-operation with senior management officials, has influenced that part of the panel in Drenica 2 to be Judge Anna Admaska Gallant, as well as Polish, for which even earlier allegedly has a relationship with Silecki. Its involvement in this case, according to Simmon's e-mail, is seen as the security of the defendant's sentence in the case, namely, Sylejman Selimi has been sentenced to 7 years in prison, Isni Thaci to 6 years and 6 months, Zecir and Jahir Demaku, with six years in prison, Agim, Dritton, Ceman Demaj Union for 3 years, has been sentenced to the Fadil of Nedzat Demacu.

The presiding judge in the Drenica case, Dariusz Sielecki, has conspired with the mission's top managers to place Judge Anna Adamska as EULEX's second judge on the court. I reported this to the mission management. Senior mission managers were aware of the relations between these two EULEX judges and the way it was involved in college. I was instructed not to continue this matter further. The mission's management was convinced that with the chairman of the Sielicki (and Judge Adamska as a member of the panel), a sentence was provided. “wrote in the document provided by RTK.

Not only the two Drenica judges, Darius Sielicki and Anna Adamska Gallant, came from Poland. The charges were set up by prosecutor Maurisio Salustro, but the case was continued by the prosecutor, Caesar Michaczuk, who was also Polish.

The Roads Commission in RTK has provided yet another communication of the judge who recently resigned from EULEX, Malcolm Simmons, with the next EULEX judge, Kssimir Mazzalov. Here are the obstacles Simmons was given to bring new evidence of the abuses in the Drenica case two before the Supreme Court court. If Simmons was given the chance to testify, very easily the verdict in the Drenica 2 case could take another turn.

“Krassimir, I am concerned that any conversation between us will be used for someone's interest and subject to later criticism.

My tests would be dealt with (a) serious irregularities in the composition of the jury, (b) manipulation of the court's composition, (c) comments made by the chairman of the court questioning his impartiality and (d) communication between the chairman of the court and the defense attorney.

I believe it would be in the interest of justice that I testify to the council defending that it will be used before the Supreme Court. ”

Actually, EULEX and the European Union, instead of taking on charges brought by Malcolm Simmons to initiate the case, they have nailed on serious British charges.

Over the past year, Malcolm Simmons has been the target of several independent investigations into some serious claims against him. These investigations are being conducted by a team that is established and located in Brussels, led by a former judge of the European Court of Justice”, the EULEX statement said.

After the charges EULEX made at his address, RTK has managed to provide itself for Simmons.

The European Union's response to my accusations was expected. Instead of demanding the treatment of my concerns, they continue to attack me.

The EU says I have failed to co-operate in an investigation they filed to review the charges I made against the mission and the European Foreign Action Service.

It is true that the European Foreign Action Service has created an investigative team led by a former judge to investigate my claims. However, the task of the investigation is determined by a member of the European Foreign Action Service staff, which I have accused of mismanagement and obstructing an investigation. These charges are part of my complaint. The same member of the European Foreign Action Service staff chose investigators (who are members of the European Foreign Action Service staff) and is about what the investigative team will report. Is this an independent investigation?

The Road Show team has managed to provide evidence of yet more cases in which EULEX judges have imposed justice. Their publication will be made in a cycle of research that will be made public this week.