The specialist also does a favor to the Prosecutor: Lets him participate when defense interviews his witnesses

Hague prosecutors will be able to participate in any interview the lawyers of KLA leaders do with their witnesses. So at least it says in the last decision the judge has made about the witness interview manual. The ruling, issued by Nationale, is said to have to be done with a request by the court.

Corruption / Former EULEX judges chief returns to stage: new claims in Klecka case and corruption show
The prosecution has demanded access to each interview, the Special Court has accepted the same. It's just, he's decided, as a condition that the SPS address the court on request to participate in those interviews.

Although the statement mentions “pala calling” and “pale”, on the question of interviewing witnesses that's worth most to defence. After the prosecution has only completed most of the interviews with witnesses.

If an opposing party wants to interview a witness of the other side, the call party should announce at least 10 days before the target interview. The call side will trust if the witness agrees to be interviewed by the opposing side, and should inform the witness of the opportunity. The call party will inform the opposing party if the witness has consented. In addition, when the calling side believes that the security of a witness may be in danger, it can ask the Judiciary Panel to participate in any meeting between the other side and the witness, regardless of the witness's will”, it is said specifically in the decision.

Social Network / Kurti said Minister Svechla travels to Brussels, ironising Mushkolaj: Bravo for Efficiency
“Under extraordinary circumstances, a pala or participants, after having consulted sufficiently in advance with the registration office, could address the panel to request the additional presence of the census representatives. The call party will inform the opposing side if the witness agrees. In addition, when the caller side believes that the security and security of a witness could be put at risk, or for other legitimate reasons, it might ask the panel to allow it to participate in any meeting between the opposing side and the witness, regardless of the witness's testimony. If the calling side tells the opposing side that it will do so, the opposing side will refrain from interviewing the witness until the panel has made its decision”, the judge's decision is highlighted.

According to the judge, this ruling does not violate the equality of weapons or fair judgment. This, however, that the defence is now unlikely to participate in prosecution interviews with witnesses because they have already ended.

“Cornisa enjoys grounds in the law, and the judge is aware that this will respect the rights of the accused under international law. The judge addresses the defence arguments, claiming that Cornia violates a series of elements for fair judgment regarding the equality of arms. Where the GEDNJ has found that each side should be given a reasonable opportunity to present its case under conditions that do not put it in a disadvantage against opponent”, the decision said.

“Secon second, Defence claims that the prosecution's involvement in seeking the approval of a witness to be interviewed and the prosecution's presence during witness defence interviews will have a cooling effect. The judge of the preliminary procedure considers that the hypothetical concerns raised by the defence do not question the conclusion that, based on the foregoing considerations, the proposed Frame allows the SPS to participate in witness defence interviews. As reflected in the proposed Framework, Z. The SP will act in trust and, if there is a concrete and fundamental reason to consider that this is not the case”, it is highlighted further.

On the basis of international practices, this could cause even more delays in judicial procedure.

And when the opposing side in this case conducts an interview with witnesses, the judge has counted several conditions: to ensure that the interview is conducted effectively and quickly, to prepare copies of the witness with the language he understands, to refrain from conversations outside the interview, and to refrain from threatening actions.

In this witness interrogation manual, the judge of the preliminary procedure has set several conditions for the handling of confidential information during the investigation.

“Piles and participants are obliged not to disclose any confidential documents or information to the parties. This Framework stipulates that the discovery of documents or confidential information, as part of investigative activities by one side or another, is exclusively allowed”, the decision says.

A number of other measures that have been approved in this decision have been published on the Special Court page. There are the ways of the interview, the lengths, the distribution of documents for witnesses, and so on.

The protection of KLA leaders has consistently accused the judge of the preliminary procedure, that the posi keeps the specialised prosecutor's side on. So far, most of the lawyers' complaints have been dropped including the Court of Appeals and Constitutional Court.