“ - The quiet government for Thaci's new indictment, opposition demands hearing

It has been days since the Special Court has been activated with new shares against former KLA superiors. Recent raids and arrests have culminated last night with the establishment of a new indictment against former President Hashim Thaci. The charge, which concerns obstructing justice, is viewed as absurd and political in the eyes of opinion [...]
It has been days since the Special Court has been activated with new shares against former KLA superiors. Recent raids and arrests have culminated last night with the establishment of a new indictment against former President Hashim Thaci.
The charge, which concerns obstructing justice, is viewed as absurd and political in the eyes of local public opinion. Although the Kosovo institutions have established this court, so far, power in Kosovo has made no reaction.
The presidency, Parliament and Government have so far not said a word about the latest shares of this court.
After the indictment, those who have reacted are only opposition deputies.
They have asked the Kosovo Assembly to meet to discuss the recent actions of the Special Court.
PDK MP Ganimete Musliu has said the Kosovo Assembly must meet urgently and debate the work of this court.
In its account in “Facebook”, Musliu wrote that the Parliament should prevent this court from political persecution.
“The Kosovo Parliament must meet urgently and debate the Special Court in The Hague and tell STOP political persecutions!”, Musliu wrote.
Even AAK deputy Pal Lekaj has expressed concern over the new special charge against Thaci.
In his account in “Facebook”, Lekaj wrote that the Special is continuing to question the dual standards I use and the political impact it may have on legal processes.
The establishment of the new indictment against former President Hashim Thaci and others for obstruction of justice is a development that raises serious questions about the purposes and methodology of the Special Court. This institution, which was initially presented as guarantor of justice for claims against the Kosovo Liberation Army, is continuing to arouse doubts about the dual standards it uses and the political impact it may have on legal processes. Instead of contributing to clarifying the truth and establishing justice, the Court seems to be focusing on pursuing war leaders, ignoring Kosovo's historical context and existential challenges during the liberation fight. The charges of “obstructing justice” appear more like attempts to punish individuals specified than addressing real legal issues”, Lekaj wrote.
He has warned that this development could deepen political and social divisions in Kosovo.
“Moreover, this development can deepen political and social divisions in Kosovo, at a time when the country needs unity and focus on democratic reforms and Euro-Atlantic integration. Justice cannot be used as an instrument to delegate a people's righteous struggle for freedom and independence. We ask international institutions to ensure a fair and transparent process based on irrefutable evidence and away from political influences. Our freedom struggle cannot be overshadowed by attacks aimed at distorting our history and damaging our leaders who have defended national dignity”, Lekaj wrote.
Meanwhile, former AAK President Daut Haradinaj has called for the breach of this court.
“The Special Court was established in the Parliament of Kosovo, and the Kosovo Parliament is the highest body to have to undo. Let us unite your belief in the next election. We'll get rid of it. Stop it!”, he wrote on his proxy at “Facebook”.
On the other hand, OVL-KLA Chairman Faton Klinku's task officer, has indicated how the Special Court turns out.
He has suggested that the disinclination of the Special comes about voluntarily by the majority of Kosovo deputies.
“The Kosovo Assembly adopts and changes laws. 61 MPs must take part in the session to make the quorum, which then participate in the vote. With 31 votes to change, break down, or become a new law on Kosovo Specialised Chambers. If someone then doesn't like it, I can send it to the Constitutional Court for interpretation. It was that simple and that's it. We've constantly called for this, especially when this court has been so degraded”, he wrote in his account to “Facebook”.












