The specialist accepts Haradinaj's complaint of wrongdoing in the indictment: the case passes to Apel

Gucati and Haradinaj had complained of the indictment brought against them, basing it on allegations concerning possible legal violations that could have been committed by the Specialised Prosecutor's Office. Judge Nicolas Guillou accepted this complaint, sending the course to the Court of Appeals that works under the Special Court.

The defences of Gucati and Haradinaj listed five points with doubts, thus claiming there are serious violations on the prosecution's part. Allegations of lawyers from OVL leaders are summed up at five points, as follows:

One. If the Pre-emptive Procedure Judge was mistaken when he found that the confirmed Acropolis was not flawed in the absence of other data on the identity of the co-chairmen, given the request to file as much detail as possible about the identities of any alleged associate.

2 . If the Pre-Prepave Procedure Judge was mistaken when he found that the confirmed Acropolis was not flawed in lack of other data on the identity of collaborators, given the request to give as much detail as possible in the identity of any alleged accomplice.

3 . If the pretrial judge erred by finding that the confirmed indictment was not flawed in the lack of any other data on the identity of assisted or motivated persons in view of the request to secure in the indictment as much detail as possible regarding the identity of any assisted or motivated person.

Four. If the prosecutor of the preliminary procedure was mistaken when he found that it was not a defect in the Aktakuza confirmed to use the “formula / or” to be referred alternatively to the accused associate, nameless or unnamed associates when the objecting of alleged wrongdoing, in view of the request that should not be used formulas which create uncertainty about the accused's responsibility.

Five. If the Confirmed Act is flawed in what claims unknown “ ” which supposedly “could have occurred after “known “, actions that allegedly took place, given the request that open statements regarding the facts supporting the accusations are not allowed, unless they are extremely necessary, which has not been stated.

In his decision to approve the motion, Judge Guillou says all five issues raised are material to be left in the Special Chambers of Appeals, and a decision by this instance would affect the right and quick development of the procedure.

In the conclusion, the judge said allegations raised by Haradinaj's Guncat lawyers would affect the course of the trial procedures on them.

“In light of what was said earlier, the pre-procedure judge finds that the five issues will significantly influence the right and rapid development of procedures and an immediate solution by the Court of Appeals in connection with them can advance the procedures materially. The Procedure Procedure Judge in line with the circumstances confirms the five issues under parameters given in paragraph 21”, the verdict is said to reason.

Judge Guillou has asked Apel to issue a verdict on issues filed by Haradinaj's Gucati.