3 minutes ago71 protected witnesses, Thaci's lawyer rejects the verdict: It's affecting our investigation.
Periskopi(5 years ago)
(5 years ago)71 protected witnesses are expected to give their testimony at the Special Court in the case against Hashim Thaci, Kadri Veselin, Rexhep Selimi and Jakup Krasniqi. All these persons the court has placed their status on “protected” and therefore their evidence will not appear to the public the same as their identity. This I am [...]
71 protected witnesses are expected to give their testimony at the Special Court in the case against Hashim Thaci, Kadri Veselin, Rexhep Selimi and Jakup Krasniqi. All these persons the court has placed their status on “protected” and therefore their evidence will not appear to the public the same as their identity. That is strongly opposed to Hashim Thaci's defence, lawyer David Hooper.
Hashim Thaci's lawyer, David Hooper, is rejecting the form of how the Special Court has placed 71 witnesses under protection in the former president's case. Hooper, in a complaint, has said that the Judge of the preliminary procedure has not assessed the circumstances individually for each witness but that the verdict is taken in general form, writes the news.net.
Mr. Thaci's subservation considers that the Pre-emptive Procedure Judge has not ruled for each witness and specific link between risk and defence claims, but is based on “fears subjectives generalised in unsubstantiated statements”, said in the argument of lawyer Hooper.
This argument has been rejected by the Special Prosecutor's Office, which has said that the judge has made individual assessments if the discovery poses an identifiable danger and that the lawyer Hooper is wrongly based on alleged facts.
Defence claims continue to consist in the fact that, according to them, the Court has made group assessments of high-profile witnesses, rather than individuals as it was said the most.
Lawyer Hooper says the preliminary judge has not taken on the principle of proportionism for witness protection measures, and in that form has significantly influenced the defence capacity to effectively and efficiently investigate evidence in court.
The trial of the preliminary procedure recalls that any safeguard clause should be proportional in the function of prejudice caused against the accused and a fair judgment. Thaci's defence appears to take into account the preliminary procedure judge's analysis of only six witnesses whose identities were required to be discovered 30 days before their respective testimony”, the document issued by the Court said.
“Against what Thaci's defense claims, the conclusion contained in paragraph 96 of the rejected verdict concerns the proportion of measures involving six witnesses, while the assessment and outcome given in paragraph 97 of the controversial verdict discusses the quantum impact on the right to protect these safeguard clauses and those already authorised in connection with five additional witnesses. 40 in this context is noteworthy that the findings in paragraph 97 of the controversial decision are the result of defence concerns over the alleged impact of the measures on defence capacity to challenge the SPO issue and conduct appropriate investigations before witness testimony. Just to say that Defence Thaci misjudges the controversial verdict, claiming that the pre-procedure judge did not properly assess the proportion”, the document issued by the Special Court said.
Otherwise, the trial of the preliminary procedure has rejected Thaci's defence requirements, Veselin, Selimi's Krasniqi, for provisional release from custody several days ago.
