Scandalous: The Specialised Prosecutor's Office violated labour regulations, professional ethics and its laws

However, publishing this announcement is outside any professional ethics.

In a judicial process, the first step is the prosecution's proposal of the indictment on the prosecution's pre-procedure judge.

The second step is the defendant's announcement of the prosecutor's claims and the announcement of the party he is determined to protect. In this case, apart from breaking legal procedures and breaking regulations, there was also a completely unilateral approach and arbitrary decision by the Prosecutor's Office specialised to make public announcement, without accepting any arguments of protection and not yet confirming the indictment.

After these two actions, as a third step, it would be to keep the Court of Procedure hearing for confirmation or rejection of the indictment.

The fourth step, however, has two paths and if the prosecutor's indictment is rejected by the judge because it is not supported, then that case is closed and it is not made public. But if the indictment is confirmed by the judge of the preliminary procedure, then that indictment is formalised and completely offered to the defendants and his protective side, along with all precautions.

Only after all these steps should an indictment be made public, and in this case begins the escalation of a trial, with processes similar to the procedures of all Kosovo courts.

As is easily confirmed by a common policy reading with which the Specialised Prosecutor's Office and Specialised Chambers operate, in this case we had exceeded the procedure based on the competencies of a prosecutor. We also had very selective approaches by isolating them from purposely just two names from the whole subject. But this is also the political pressure of the prosecutor to give the Court of Procedure to confirm the indictment prepared by him and if we analyze the moment of publication of that announcement, then it is also an impact on an important political process, such as the dialogue in Washington, as it reportedly had been delivered about two months ago.

The Prosecutor's Office in this case took on many roles and included the role of the Court of Procedure, the role of the Public Relations Office, the role of the Administrator, and even the role of political analyst, writing a public announcement with only political arguments, with no legal arguments.

The third paragraph of this announcement is also violation of fundamental rights, because it prejudges the guilt of two former KLA leaders, and that is violation of the Kosovo Constitution.

Exactly as this announcement is made public, with that political language, the Specialised Prosecutor's Office has violated Kosovo's Specialised Chambers and Procedures Law.

In this case, rule no. 6 (Unrespect of the Order), which says that any disrespect of the regulation that causes substantial legal injustice is mentioned immediately but not later than ten (10) days after being known for disrespect. And according to this rule, the panel may consider such disrespect for the weather as well as take appropriate measures to ensure the integrity and justice of the process.

But it has also violated rules 81 (2) and 88 (1), where rule 81 in paragraph 2 says that a party in the initial or subsequent process before the Specialised Chambers, or the Administrator, which requires changing the required safeguard clauses: (a) submits to the panel that has ordered safeguard clauses; or (b) if that panel is no longer engaged in the initial process, the panel engaged in the process afterwards.

In this case, we had a public announcement without ordering any safeguard clauses and unannounced parties.

And rule 88 (1), which explains the public status of the indictment, clearly states that only after confirmation by judges of the preliminary procedure, the indictment is made public.