Sélu confirmed charges against Thaci for inciting the obstruction of official persons, Appeals returns to review

Only what Thaci had to do with promoting Kilajt, Smajt and Fazliu to conduct criminal work of obstructing official persons in carrying out official tasks was accepted by four points of the SPS complaint, writes A pledge of justice, Transmitt Periscope.

The Appeals panel has decided that one of the four points Z had established The SP against the decision to confirm the indictment to Hashim Thaci, the Smajt Union, Fadil Fazlius and Hajredin Kuci, to accept it in terms of Thaci's criminal responsibility for inciting him to carry out criminal work “obstructing official persons in carrying out official duties.

The 4th point of the SPS complaint involved opposing the verdict that Article 32 (3) of the KPRK does not apply to the work of “Pegim of official persons” under Article 401 (3) and (5) of the KPR.

According to the ZPS, the judge was mistaken when it found out that because Article 401 (3) and (5) of the KPRK do not provide for sentences of up to five years in prison, thus Article 32 (1) is not applicable because this provision applies only to acts that are punishable by the pact of five years.

According to the ZPS, the Pre-Procedure Procedure Judge has erred by stating that, because the Article 401ʹ3) and (5) the KKP envisions the sentence from one to five years in prison, Article 32T) was not applicable, as this provision applies only to punishable acts of at least five years in prison.

Thaci's defence had said the judge has correctly interpreted this article.

KPRK Article 32 (3) for “Push” says “Anyone deliberately pushing the other person to commit criminal acts punishable by at least five (5) years in prison and criminal acts has not even been attempted, the driver is convicted of attempted”.

According to the panel, the judge had concluded that the work that falls at KPRK's Article 401 (3) is punishable from 1 to 5 years in prison, so she ruled out Thaci's responsibility according to Article 32 (3) of the KPRK for point 1, 4 and 4 of the indictment.

In addition, the panel had said there are disagreements about the interpretation of this article, as they say the lower panel has interpreted that this article is applicable to criminal acts punishable for over five years and some for those punishable under five years.

The decision said by majority of votes, the panel has agreed with the SPS, saying Article 32 (3) must be applied to works that include or even exceed five years.

“As a result, the panel finds, by majority of votes, that since the work of preventing official persons is punishable in its hard-loaded forms of imprisonment from one (1) to five (5) years, the third form of promotion under KKP's Article 32%3 is applicable in this case”, the decision said.

As a result, they considered this article's judge's decision to be wrong was not applicable to the “obstruction of official persons in performing official duties. So the panel, agreed to four points of SPS complaint.

“Since consisting of the existence of a well-based suspicion that Thaci has urged Fazliu, Smakajan and Cilajn to conduct criminal work of obstructing official persons includes an actual assessment of the evidence, the issue is returned to the Pre-Procedure Court for further review of”, the decision is said to be further in place.

Otherwise, at the first point of this complaint, the prosecution said that the judge who confirmed the indictment was mistaken in interpreting Article 35 (1) of the KPRK. According to the SPS, the judge has said that this article requires elements of criminal acts to exist at the time of the agreement, and in case it is not proven that there is no group behind the commission of criminal acts under Article 401 (2) of the KP then the charges do not stand.

The ZPS says the first article does not require that all elements of the criminal act be in place for it to become applicable and that interpretation of the judge contradicts the DPS's judicial practice.

ZPS claims the judge wrongly refused Thaci and Kuci's criminal responsibility for point 2 and 19 of the indictment involving the agreement to commit criminal acts to obstruct official persons in carrying out official tasks under Article 35 (1) and 401 (2) of KPRK

The ZPS demanded that Appeal restore responsibility according to these provisions or turn the case to the judge of the preliminary procedure to exactly enforce the law.

Thaci, represented by his defence, had said the SPS has managed to argue that the judge has erred in interpreting and implementing these provisions. He had argued that exactly it was found that the <x0 material actions of the work should exist at the time of the” agreement, and that the existence or formation of a group of at least three people should be testified by evidence.

Thaci had argued that SPS claims were speculation and that the transcript of the September 3rd 2023 visit is unclear, confused and insufficient to prove that Thaci and Kuci have discussed the involvement of a third group in the plan to contact witness 6.

At this point, the panel has found that the trial of the preliminary procedure was wrong when it declared that elements of the criminal act should exist at the time of the agreement under KPRK's Article 35 (1).

Therefore, the panel finds that the Pre-Precience Procedure Judge has erred when he stated that the KP's <x0-element material criminal acts should exist at the time of the” agreement under KKP Article 3550.

However, it means that the agreement between the alleged authors -- Thaci and Kuci -- must be linked to the fact that the targeted obstruction will be carried out as part of a “group” made up of at least three persons, as defined at KKP Article 11312. In other words, the alleged authors should have an agreement on the constituent elements of the KP 401KP's criminal act, including the participation of a third person”, the decision said.

But to prove the existence of a deal, the panel says it cannot be said to be a group only from Thaci and Kuci's agreement to include a third person without evidence that the person in question is part of the group or will be.

As a result, the panel has dropped the first point of SPS complaint.

At the second point, the SPS claimed that the judge was wrong when it found out that since Smaj, Kilaj and Fazliu were not party to Thaci's war crimes proceedings, they have not had legal obligations under KPRC's 392 dealing with “contempt of court”.

The SPS had taken the case at the International Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, adding that people who were not in the process were prosecuted for disrespecting the court, including revealing confidential information.

The prosecution had said that the court's approach is disturbing because of indigestion by sending dangerous messages that individuals who are not parties to a case may not obey the court's orders regarding witness protection.

As a result, the SPS had demanded that Appeals restore 14th and 18th of the indictment, which includes responsibility for co-ordination in criminal work or return the case of the judge to enforce the law.

Thaci's defense had argued in question, saying that the term '%tttius obeys shows that this criminal act can only be committed by the person against whom there is a judicial order. As a result, they have argued that the judge rightly found that Smaj, Kilaj and Fazliu were not party to, nor were they participants in random war crimes procedures and that they had no obligation to the tribunal.

Chilaj had also argued that the judge has reasonably concluded by deciding that this article cannot be applied to these people.

The ZPS had countered that the article in question mentioned the word “anyone” and does not specify any sides.

According to the panel, provisions 9-12, 14, 16, 18 and 20 of the indictment handed down by the SPS has claimed that between June 26th and November 2nd 2023, Thaci, Fazliu, Smaj, Kuci and Cilaj failed to obey the final orders involved in the decision on the Contact Protocol, as well as that Thaci and Klaj failed to obey the decision on safeguard clause measures, both of these verdicts issued by the war crimes prosecutor.

According to these decisions, parties and participants were ordered not to reveal confidential information about parties that are not participants.

The panel says that since Fazliu, Smaj and Kilaj “are neither Paul nor participants” in those procedures, these decisions “do not impose on them direct obligations that could not be obeyed”.

So the panel has said that this work can be accomplished only by persons to whom it was ordered. As a result, the panel also dismissed the ZPS complaint' point two.

Also, the panel had dismissed point 3 of the complaint after, as stated earlier that Fazli, Kilaj and Smaj São have committed criminal work that falls at KPRK's Article 393, then said that there are no errors in the judge's assessment concerning co-ordination under the charges of 9, 11 and 12 of the submitted indictment.

Otherwise, in this case the Smaj Union, Fadil Fazliu and Isni Kilaj were arrested on December 5th 2024 in Kosovo and transferred to the detention facility in DrsK, on December 6, 2024, under the confirmed indictment and reported arrest by The Hague.

While, Thaci has been handed over to the warrant at the detention facility at The Hague on December 5th, 2024, always according to the DK's announcement.

In contrast, Hajredin Kuci has been handed over to the confirmed indictment and the call to appear before the court of preliminary procedure for the initial presentation, which was held on December 9th.

According to the indictment, Thaci individually and through joint actions with groups; The band Fazliu (Fadil Fazliu and Fahri Fazliu), the Smaj Group (Bashkim Smaj, Blerim Shala and Artan Behrami) and the Kilaj Group (Isni Kilaj and Vlasnim Mayoriu) have followed a pattern of conduct to prevent official persons from performing official duties.

The indictment says Thaci has led and participated in these efforts through his visits to detention facilities during the time he was detained under his trial for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

It says that members of the Fazliu Group, the Smaj Group and the Kilaj Group were co-ordinated to influence SPS witnesses during the privileged visits of July 2nd, September 9th and October 6, 2023.

As a result, three counts of obstructing the official person in carrying out official duties bear against Thaci three counts of violations of the procedure's secrecy and four counts of disobedience to the court.

While, Kilaj, Smaj and Fazliu are accused of trying to prevent official persons from performing official duties and disobeying the tribunal. However, Kuci has two counts of contempt of court. /Periscope/