Dastid Pallaska wins a battle at Special Court

Initially, the procedure's history has been presented in the decision, stressing that on May 10th, 2023, the ZPS asked the panel to warn Hashim Thaci's co-avocate, Dastid Pallaska for public statements made on RTK Prime's show on April 13th 2023, reports the “Bettim for Justice”.

On May 18th, at Thaci's oral request for defence, the panel has given an extension of the line of words from 6 thousand to 7 thousand words to respond to the request, which since May 22nd, Thaci's defence has given answers, to which the ZPS on May 30th has issued counter-responds.

Furthermore, the parties' parachutes have been evacuated.

The ZPS has confirmed that public statements made by Pallaska on the RTK Prime show on April 13th 2023 conflict with Article 13 (a) of the Professional Conduct Code for Pre-KSF lawyers and the 15-20th Council of Procedure Council paragraphs, which prohibit statements that are false, knowingly or that comment on the front panel requirements.

Hence, the ZPS has asked the panel to remind attorney Pallaska to abide by the terms of Article 13 (a) the Code of Goodwill and guidelines in the Order of the Council for Procedure and refrain from making future statements that violate them, as such statements according to Z. The SP has a negative impact on the integrity of the procedure.

The ZPS further demands that Pallaska be warned that any future violations of the Code of Conduct or Order for Procedure Procedure Procedures could result in sanctions.

On the other hand, Thaci's defence has replied that the foundation of the request lies in the SPS's misinterpretations for the comments of attorney Pallaska and that the same should not suffer damage to public reputation from ZPS manipulation with his comments.

But, in the reverse response of the SPS, none of the reasons presented by Thaci's defence reportedly changes the fact that Pallaska has made public statements that, according to any objective standard, were false and/or misleading, and that giving a warning is an appropriate measure to take the panel.

Likewise, the DPS decision contains legislation in force and that, under Article 40 (2), the panel is said to ensure that the judgment is fair and swift and that procedures are conducted in line with the rules of procedure and evidence, with full respect for the accused's rights and proper respect for the protection of victims and witnesses.

As well as, it is said that under Article 40 (2) and rule 116 (3), the panel can provide guidelines for the development of procedures according to the need to ensure a fair and swift trial, which on the basis of the 63rd rule, the panel may warn the lawyer or prosecutor of conduct that is offensive, abusive or in some other way preventing proper development of procedure, or if such a lawyer or prosecutor fails to meet the professional ethics standard in carrying out his/her duties.

On the other hand, Article 13 (a) of the Code of Conduct predicts that lawyers and prosecutors should not knowingly make statements in social media, the press or the public, which are false or slander, or reveal confidential information, including those involved in the procedure.

In the Special's decision, it is now said that Thaci's defence has responded that the SPS claim that Pallaska “publicly charges the Prosecutor for the propaganda of lies, in order to label Kosovo a criminal state” misinterprets his comments and that Pallasca's comments are simply repeated of well-designed defence positions on issues that are part of Thaci's defence.

In addition, according to defence Pallaska did not comment on direct court processes before the panel, and that the SPS has not reasoned on its request to limit Thaci's and his lawyers' fundamental rights.

And according to the SPS, a certain responsible lawyer, among other things, sincerity and diligence, cannot rely on ignorance to avoid responsibility for his public statements and that the articulation of public defense positions does not free the lawyer from respecting Article 13 (a) the Code of Conduct and Order for Procedure.

According to the panel, the Pallaska's role as Thaci's co-autoka does not result in suppressing his right to freedom of speech, which he continues to enjoy, but that his involvement as a lawyer in these processes, however, authorises the establishment of restrictions on this right as long as they are necessary and proportional to ensure the protection of other legitimate public interests and as far as they are in line with relevant legal standards in the matter.

The panel stresses that the TSF's work is a matter of public interest in Kosovo, considering that lawyers have an important role in managing justice as mediator between the public and courts.

According to the panel, those appointed as lawyers before this court have a special responsibility to ensure that the judicial process is conducted exclusively before the relevant panel and that court processes are not conducted through the media.

Furthermore, they are said to be required not to make conscious statements in social media, the press, or the public, which are false or slanderous, or to reveal confidential information, including those involved in the proceedings.

For this reason, the panel is said to be of the opinion that Pallaska's comments on the jurisdiction of the TSF and the scope of the SPS case, although often uninformed and inaccurate, constitute personal opinions that address elected issues that have appeared before TSK in the past.

Similarly, it is said that the Polaska lawyer's statements on certain categories of evidence, about safeguards and continued detentions were made abstractly, and were not specific enough to qualify as a model of comments on direct conflict before the panel.

“Therefore, the panel finds that RTK's statements: (i) did not constitute an attempt to deceive the public knowingly or influence the decisions of the panel, and (i) did not reveal confidential information”, the decision says.

Consequently, the panel's decision has found that the SPS has failed to demonstrate that Pallaska's warning is necessary under the circumstances and that it would constitute a proportional intervention in the law of Polaska attorney for free words.

For these reasons, the panel has rejected Z's request The SP's so the Pack can be warned.

But since the decision. Also, concrete talk about the Palka lawyer's statement that the Kosovo Liberation Army (UÇK) is on trial in this case and that the SPS's goal is to declare Kosovo a criminal state.

In this regard, the panel has stressed that SPS has declared that “U n CK is not in court. KLA liberation war is not on trial” and that the panel has also declared that “ [Paneli] and the parties have only to deal with events and circumstances that are relevant to these accused” and that no part of the indictment reasonably suggests that the KLA or Kosovo as a whole are on trial.

Therefore, the panel has instructed Thaci's chief lawyer to bring to the attention of lawyer Pallaska and to emphasise and re-focus that cases in question should be resolved by the lawyer of the accused and SPS exclusively before the panel, not the media.

“Paneli will consider any further public statement by the lawyer suggesting that the KLA is on trial in this case, as if it were knowingly being made contrary to judicial statements to the contrary, it is said further in the decision.

The panel further points out that it falls to the responsibilities of each principal lawyer to remind the co-avocate and other members of the team of their obligations under the Code of Conduct and Order for Procedure and issue warnings where it is appropriate without judicial interference.

The decision on the prosecution's request, to look after Polaska lawyer, can be found in English: THESE.

Otherwise, during April, the trial has begun against former President Hashim Thaci, former Prime Ministers Kadri Veselin and Jakup Krasniqi, as well as former delegation Rexhep Selimi, until the April 3rd session, the Prosecutor's Office Specialised (ZPS) and the defender of the victims have submitted the opening statements and following reading the act changed by the SPS, Thaci, Veselin, Krasniqi and Selimi were declared innocent of the criminal acts imposed on them.