Thaci's and Wessel's defense highlight the injustices brought upon him with the gravity of the charges: Rights Breakup

The prosecution's indictment of Kosovo Liberation Army former leaders had been rejected in an earlier phase by former President Hashim Thaci's defence side and former prime minister, Kadri Veselin, in their encounter with the Specialised Chambers.

Gregory Kehoe, lawyer of former President Hashim Thaci, and Ben Emmerson at the same time lawyer of former Prime Minister Kadri Veselini, had appealed such a decision, while the same was rejected by the Appeals Panel, while in recent published claims, talk of new crimes allegedly committed in several villages of Suhareka and Gjilan, deankosovatv.

Former President Hashim Thaci, in his complaint, had said that the preliminary judge was wrong when he gave his findings that fulfilling the indictment does not imply new accusations.

In fact, according to Thaci, on whose behalf the Kehoe attorney had complained, the prosecution on the new charges claims to be in the court's personal participation, so this constituted violations of the court's legal regulations.

” [Hashim] Thaci claims that the judge of the preliminary procedure erred when he found that the amendments to the Third Catagoria did not amount to new charges in accordance with the Rule 90km2. More specifically, he states that the new 43th paragraph of the proposed modified Act has to do with a new incident that claims the accused's personal participation in the treatment of counterists in a new country. In his opinion, and “, in the absence of more details”, these are not material facts that give greater accuracy a form of already stated participation and that support the existing claim for personal participation in intimidation, interrogation, mistreatment and detention of opponents as the judge found, but are new charges”, said in Keho's claim.

Until former Prime Minister Kadri Veseli had specified the problem from which, as quoted, space would be created for the prosecution to add countless alleged alleged cases of involvement in alleged crimes.

” [Carri] Wessel claims it was insufficient for the judge of the preliminary procedure to conclude that changes in the Third Catagoria did not constitute new charges because they included “canos, interrogation, mistreatment or ban of opponents”. According to him, it would allow the prosecution to add countless alleged cases of personal participation of the accused on condition they adapt to that general description and make the issue of new charges “realistically controversial”, it was said at one point in Emmerson's complaint.

According to Wessel's defense, as reported in the news.net, the preliminary judge has made an uncritical reading of previous procedures and the form of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, in which, according to Emmerson, the pre-eminent French judge has so far been backed.

” Pass [Carri] Wessels, the exact legal test and critical question should be whether the amendments to the Third Categoria could in themselves support the conclusion that the Acusued one actually participated in the supposed NPK, thus presenting an additional, independent threat of punishment. If so, they constitute new accusations. Wessel opposes “the non-critical reader” of the Judge of the PPP and ICTR authorities' preliminary procedure in which he was based”, says Wessel's Appeal, quoted by his defense.

On the other hand, Emmerson has specified Wessel's position, that the prosecution has long failed to announce the defence and judge's change of indictment.

” [Carri] Wessel argues that the prosecution's request was not long after most witness statements were prepared before the surrender of the indictment, the latter was taken nine months before the prosecution's request and the prosecution's decision to re-assemble its “proposals” was not justified. According to Wessel, the numerous “processing steps --” called by the prosecution cannot demonstrate prosecutorial care since (i) none of the alleged incidents were recently revealed; (ii) because the prosecution has investigated that since 2015, it was its responsibility to interview witnesses as soon as possible; (ii) the prosecution's internal bureaucracy are not a valid excuse. Wessel adds that the prosecution failed to publicly announce the judge of the preliminary procedure and protection for its purpose to change the indictment. He claims that the judge of the preliminary procedure has erred in taking into account the procedure phase when assessed whether the prosecution has acted carefully, since it is an additional criterion to assess separately”, it is said further in the complaint of lawyer Emmerson.

Moreover, the defense side, Emmerson and Kehoe, in the letter he saw the news.net, have said that the adoption of the indictment means violations of the rights of the accused in this case.

“ [Carri] Wessel claims that the trial of the preliminary procedure failed to take into consideration the already protracted procedure when it concluded that the additional procedure steps outlined according to rule 90 (3) and (4) of the regulator “are likely to have a more limited impact”, as may be carried out in parallel with the remaining stages of the preliminary phase. Noting the pace of prosecution and the scope of the prosecution's case and the fact that preliminary procedures are likely to continue for another year, [Carri] Wessel argues that the additional procedures resulting from the proposed changes will still require additional time and will significantly “): its right to be tried within a reasonable time” is said further in the Vessel Appeal concerning the issue in question.

Meanwhile, Hashim Thaci's lawyer, Gregory Kehoe, has said that the preliminary judge, with the findings drawn on whether the indictment's amendment will produce additional steps in the procedure, is violating the former president's right to effective protection.

” [Hashim] Thaci claims the judge of the preliminary procedure has not applied the exact”thest, when it found that the additional steps caused by allowing the proposed amendments could be made parallel to the remaining phases of the preliminary phase. Thaci claims that the judge's position that defence investigations should not complete “before trial is not supported by any outside authority. According to him, it would violate the accused's right to prepare an effective defence. [Hashim] Thaci claims that the judgment will no longer begin, soon before the end of 2022”, due to subsequent failures by the Prosecutor's Office”, it is said in Kehoe's complaint.

Otherwise, Hashim Thaci, Kadri Veselini, Jakup Krasniqi and Rexhep Selimi are in custody in The Hague since November 2020.

They so far have been denied all requests for release from custody.

While on Tuesday we leave behind, four sessions have been scheduled where former KLA leaders will be singled out on the new charges.