Lawyer: Peter Shala was convicted of crimes that were not committed

This, Gilissen said during the preview of appeals points at the Appeals hearing against the Foundation decision, which sentenced him to 18 years in prison for war crimes.

Mr. Shala considers himself put into a real trap”, Gilissen said.

Prior to that, Gilissen said defence rights have been violated to be aware of evidence in the judiciary.

“The Court has seriously violated the rights of protection to be fully aware of the evidence in this court to have enough time and means to prepare itself and have violated the way evidence is presented. How it is possible to handle incriminating statements properly when you do not know whether such statements are acceptable in judicial evidence or not. You have to guess”, he said, reports the Justice Vow.

Gilissen said that this situation has been recurring during the time of the proceedings.

I must add that it is important to note that such a situation in which the defence is located has been a recurring situation during court procedures”, he said.

Shala's lawyer further says that while the indictment speaks of nine identified victims -- for whom Shala was charged with criminal responsibility -- the indictment was linked to 18 victims.

“actually, while the indictment refers to the nine victims identified and charged Mr. Shala with criminal responsibility as belonging to these 9 identified victims, the sentence of condemnation was linked to 18 victims without any possible change in the indictment at any possible moment”, he said.

The defence says Shala has been convicted of crimes not mentioned at all in the indictment.

“Shala has been convicted and convicted of crimes never mentioned in the indictment. These victims identified with you were not originally part of the prosecution's case, and the Prosecution has never identified these involved victims. He never interviewed them, and he never issued a call for them”, Gilissen said.

Additionally, Gilissen says that the prosecution never mentioned these other persons outside her case who have been identified as victims.

The procedure never said during the trial and never mentioned persons identified as victims. This means that the defence has never had the first opportunity to investigate and that the second to dispute, third to discuss, and that the fourth to present a protection for these nine additional persons as belonging to what they are called identified victims, and the prosecution has not demanded that it change its position on the terms of these nine so-called additional victims, said Gilissen.

As a result, Gilissen says that protection has had no chance to create her own protection against such ones.

I haven't had any real and effective protection options for these people. We, we don't even know what these people have to say about their so-called victimisation or lack of victimisation”, he said.

On the other hand, he says that even the court has mentioned other people as part of the so-called “Joint Criminal Enterprise”, which the Sú prosecution mentioned in the indictment.

Furthermore, the indictment has added individuals except persons mentioned in the indictment as part of the Joint Criminal Company allegedly operating in Kukes. The indictment has added to these people, while the prosecutor himself has not supported any such version with facts and has not stated how much it belongs to these people in participation in the NKP”, he said.

Jean-Louis Gilissen, he said some of these people who were added were also witnesses to the prosecution.

“The shield is deprived of any opportunity to conduct investigations, discuss, contest or file protections regarding these points. Determined and found in such a situation at the end of the trial process, we for the first time heard that these persons were part of the alleged NPK”, he said, adding that when the act of prejudice against Shala was given, it was found.

He said the defence was never informed of such procedural changes even though they had the right to be informed about it.

Mr. Shala considers himself put into a real trap”, Gilissen said.

While the other lawyer, Mohammed Hedi-Awain, said the court has committed serious violations in assessing the credibility of the prosecution's leading witnesses. /Periscope/