Former OVL-KLA leaders' defence rejects pre-procedure judge's decision

The defense has asked the court to review this case again, as stated by written statements.

Among other things, at today's session, the defence has filed objections to criminal acts and forms of responsibility in terms of the judge's decision of the preliminary procedure.

“We don't accept paragraphs 43.44,45 and 46, because it's an interpretation without any basis from the presiding judge, paragraph 50 in particular we don't accept this paragraph. The judge of the preliminary procedure has suggested that the superiors have known or must have had reason to know, that he presents an alternative, that he was revealing the identity or personal information of protected persons. Even here, we predict that at the function of Article 392, 2 and 3, at the point a chief must have known, this is the condition, which is revealing personal identity and data, and here we also present our position that the basis for this is the decision of the Court of Appeals of Kosovo, the court noted that to violate the identity of the protected witness, the chiefs should have known of the existence of its order and content. The order and content of the order in this case that defends identity and personal data was an order that ruled for the protection of the data, in the absence of this knowledge, the chief in this case was found not guilty”, attorney Jonathan Elystan Rees said.

Rees, who defends former KLA OVL head Hysni Gucatin, has said they do not accept the analysis made by the presiding court.

The judge of the preliminary procedure speaks of the revenge work, where it also speaks of the intention of revenge against persons who provide information to the police and others. Regarding paragraph 52 the judge of the preliminary procedure does not mention the element that must prove to be the goal of giving true information, paragraph 53 is not accepted by us, is the interpretation by the judge of the preliminary procedure without any basis or authority”, Rees said.

While Nasim Haradinaj's defence, Tobby Cadman has asked the court to review the case once again.

The judiciator of the preliminary procedure has made a very broad interpretation, we would like to invite the juro to investigate this case from the beginning, we'll give you the written statement”, he said.

And according to the Special Prosecutor's Office, the accused feared witnesses through their appearances at media conferences last year.

“The ZPS claims that what the accused has done is to distribute confidential information, have stated that their intention to distribute this information is to prevent the procedure and have encouraged the public, who have had access to this information as well as press employees to distribute further this information. Then in the content of the first and third package, parts of these have been distributed, so as far as specific obstruction is concerned, we have raised the claim in three parts, witnesses are afraid of what the accused have done, the ability of the SPS to investigate and prosecute these crimes was compromised, and SPS sources were diverted<ex1>, the prosecutor said.

At today's preparation conference, it became known that in paragraph 97 of the pretrial file of the Specialised Prosecutor's Office, the actions of the accused were reportedly carried out through serious threats to the SPS and indirect threats to witnesses and staff members during the exercise of their official functions.

“A can explain that if you claim that there are concrete members of your staff, which are specifically threatened by one or two indictees, if so, which actions pose serious threats to SPS staff”, the SPS judge has asked.

In this regard, the prosecutor has said that the actions of Gucat and Haradinaj last year have had an effect on the Specialised Prosecutor's Office, preventing officials from carrying out their duty.

<x0... alleged threats to witnesses according to the understanding of the provision, the fact is that there was an effect on our office, there is no official in our office who was held apart from others, but the consequence of their behavior has prevented people from performing their jobs. So we, too, have not accused anyone by name, but we said he prevented those in carrying out official duty. The way he's been holding up is that witnesses are scared and our ability to effectively investigate crimes has been hampered by this intimidation and resources are directed to address the concrete and possible consequences of witnesses, so this is how we say they've been obstructed by points 1 and 2”, the prosecutor said.

Unlike the former head, OVL- The KLA, former Deputy Chairman Nasim Haradinaj, has not attended the session today in the Specialised Chambers.

As long as there has been no objection to the court, Haradinaj has concerns as regards the prosecutor's behaviour, so he has refused to attend the session and is expected to act at the conference tomorrow.