The special suspect in Kosovo Police's ability to release Veselin, the lawyer openly exposes them

Ben Emmerson, Kadri Wessel's lawyer at the Special Court, has another letter two days ago regarding his refusal by Apel for protecting his client's freedom. There, Emmerson has objected to some of the arguments the Specialised Prosecutor's Office has given him, as well as has recorded errors in measuring circumstances by the Pre-emptive Procedure Judge.

A letter by Ben Emmerson, Kadri Veseli's lawyer at The Hague, has been sent to the Special Court's Special Chambers 10 May. Emmerson on the scene cites the fact that the Pre-Procedure Judge has expressed his doubts about the Kosovo Police's ability to monitor the terms of Kadri Wessel's possible release, opposing the arguments given by him, the news writes.

Mr. Wessel from the Kosovo Police was the only reason he distinguished between the risk of flying (which could be relaxed fairly by the conditions) and the risk of intervention in justice”, said the Emmerson parade.

And such an approach of the judge has prompted the harsh reaction of lawyer Emmerson, who calls this conspiracy meaningless.

This is because, according to Emmerson, this paragraph released by the Pre-Plain Judge, has no assessment of the police's inability to enforce communication restrictions, which was the primary reason why the Court of Appeals panel, at the recommendation of that preliminary, rejected the race provided by Kosovo police.

Therefore, it is clear beyond doubt that this was the crucial factor in his final decision, namely that the risk he had identified as “kic “” cannot be tempered with adequate house arrest in Kosovo, even supervised and implemented by Kosovo police. He went on to discover that this danger of private communications cannot be eased by “any additional restrictions imposed by the Pre-emptive Procedure Judge” because there was no way that restrictions on private communications could be implemented or monitored”. There is no possible way to read or interpret that paragraph, which does not include an assessment meant by the Kosovo Police Incapacitate to “implement or monitor” communications restrictions”, attorney Emmerson said further.

On the other hand, Emmerson has said that the Pre-Procedure Procedure Judge had no right, having no provatory basis to reach such conclusions regarding Kosovo Police capabilities.

In this context, Emmerson has once again invited the Court of Appeals to read carefully the statements of witnesses involved in Kadri Wessel's parole request, the news reads away.

There was absolutely no provatory basis that allowed the Judge to reach that conclusion. Addition 1 of Wessel's Defence Response to the SPS parade on pretrial release contained a statement by Justice Minister Selim Selimi, who joined a written assurance by the Kosovo Police Service chief. The Appeals Chamber is invited to read all the statements of witnesses attached to that file because they are essential to Veselin”'s appeal bases, the statement says further.

Wessel's lawyer further in his argument has mentioned the skills of Kosovo Police Specialised Units in the close protection of diplomats, extraditions, high-risk, anti-terrorism operations, the arrest of high-risk suspects and other operations under law enforcement.

The race ignored by Apel: Why is the Special in the Capacity of the Kosovo Police?

“Specialised Division Units (“DSU”) have a range of police functions, including close VIP protection and diplomatic protection; accompanying international delegations; conveying suspects for extradition (including high-risk suspects); anti-terrorism operations; arresting high-risk suspects; and connecting to other law enforcement entities, including EULEX and DSK. elite units include the Special Intervention Unit and the Special Operations Unit. The KPS also has a close defence unit. The KPS has assisted the Specialised Prosecutor's Office in a number of Kosovo operations, and they consider it part of their professional obligations to help and support the work of Kosovo's Specialised Chambers DSK”, Emmerson mentions further.

But that is not all. Emmerson has called the action of the Specialised Prosecutor's Office unimaginable when he suggested that these appeals procedures were open to the Pre-Procedure Justice that he base his decision on the assumption of Kosovo Police inefficiency.

Based on the annexes attached to the request for Wessel's release, Emmerson said that the evidence before the Preemptive Judge was by impressive and undisputed witnesses who were willing to answer every question.

It is, with all due respect, unrealistic for the SPO to suggest in these appeals procedures that it was open to the Procedure Judge to base his decision (as he undoubtedly did) on the assumption that the Kosovo Police Service could not “define Wessel's ability to communicate, through any means of the republic, with his community or its support network<2> because the terms that personally prohibit communication or electronic means<3> cannot be implemented and monitored neither could be implemented nor <43> The evidence before him was from impressive and undisputed witnesses who were in a unique position to answer any questions about the Kosovo Police's capacity to monitor electronic communication, implement a ban on internet access and restrict visitors to those before approved. The evidence of these two witnesses, Police Director and former Justice Minister Selim Selimi, stated in the sense that Kosovo Police had the capacity to implement any conditions the DSK could impose”, says Emmerson's argument.

Otherwise, the Appeal Rooms operating under the Special Court a few days ago rejected the defence attorneys' requests for the release of former KLA leaders.