Thaci's claims that the case for justice management should be initiated by the court in the war crimes case

The decision was made on June 19th 2025 by the judge of the preliminary procedure, Marjorie Masselot, who also brought down Thaci's claim that her assignment in this case was in conflict with the Law, reports “Justice Vought“, broadcast Periscope.

According to the chronology of the procedures, on November 29, 2024, the indictment against Thaci, the Smajt Union, Isni Kilajt, Fadil Fazliu and Hajredin Kuci was partially confirmed for criminal acts against justice administration.

On February 12th 2025, the prosecution filed a complaint against the confirmed indictment, and on April 3rd the Court of Appeals decided that the case would be returned to the judge of the preliminary procedure for review.

On April 14, 2025, the court's initial procedure changed the verdict in line with Apel's decision and two days later hand it over. On May 8, 2025, Thaci's defence had submitted its motion on the matter.

In its motion, Thaci's defence has contested the competencies of the judge of the preliminary procedure to review his current case.

According to defence, these procedures such as this review and confirmation of the indictment fall into the jurisdiction of the court in the case of war crimes from which the case originated.

Also, Thaci claims that the judge of the preliminary procedure in this case has been appointed in opposition to the law after acting as the sole judge during the investigation into acts allegedly committed by Thaci and others.

The defence says the court in the war crimes case has the obligation to be fair, swift and to develop procedures by respecting the rights of the accused.

They say the court cannot fulfill this obligation if another panel is charged with issues involving managing its case.

The defense claims that the court in the war crimes case should have exclusive competence and responsibility on all aspects, including claims of contempt of the court and interference with witnesses.

“... so it was a task of the judicial panel II to oversee the investigation into alleged acts in the current case, to determine whether they justified an indictment and a particular case, and to decide whether another Panel should be charged”, the decision, which cites defence statements.

The defence also claims that current procedures have undermined the court's authority in the war crimes case to ensure fair judgment in that case.

The court's “Trug has been deprived of the possibility of preventing and handling witness intervention claims; (ii) any decision to be made by the Court II on evidence provided by witnesses from the 06th case, which SPS claims are influenced ) risks violating the presumption of Mr. Thaci and prejudge the outcome of the current issue; (ii) capacity, time and means available to Mr. Thaci for preparing defence on the 06th issue has been significantly influenced by current procedures; and (iv) Court II cannot guarantee Mr. Thaci as a detainee, since he is currently subject to a separate detention regime under current procedures”, Thaci's defence was quoted as setting out.

Thaci's defence has also argued that the only judge can act only when no court is charged to manage claims of interference in the war crimes case. In their view, there was a certain jury in this case.

“Chamber Speaker gave the judge only a permanent “mandate on investigative issues, a role not predicted by Law or Order, which instead predicts that each assignment should be temporary; and (ii) The head appointed as the Pre-Procedure Court in all cases the same two judges who had previously acted as the Only Judge, contrary to Article 33 (1) (a) and (4) of the Law, which predicts that a judge could not be appointed to successive roles within the same case”, was quoted as setting forth Thaci's defense.

As a result, Thaci's defence has said the amended indictment is invalid and should be rejected due to lack of jurisdiction, given the fact that it is acting outside the competencies.

However, the prosecution has responded that this motion should be dismissed as a whole, since it has no legal basis and raises unacceptable cases.

The prosecution claims Thaci's arguments to the court's competencies in the war crimes case conflict with the Law and the Order.

According to them, the authority to conduct investigations and establish the indictment belongs solely Z The SP and that Thaci's defence is ignoring the applicable law before DPSC, trying to bring rules used by other courts.

“ ... Court Chambers II's claims to manage the procedures at Court 06 do not lie in other procedures involving various and various accused charges; (vi) Article 335) of the Law effectively prohibits the involvement of judges of the Court II in some criminal procedure stemming from the violations of Article 15] the Law; and (vi) Thaci's defence statements that the body II has been obstructed in implementing measures against his violations, that his authority has been undermined or marginalised, and that it cannot guarantee a more fair trial of 06, the former court has been quoted before the prosecution.

The prosecution also claims that the fact that the single judge's appointment was made for a permanent mandate is wrong, unsupported and incorrect.

“...if Thaci's defense wanted to counter the appointment of the Single Court and just like the Pre-Procedure Procedure Court, it should have submitted a request for exemption according to Rule 20 before the mayor; (v) the appointment of the Pre-Procedure Court is in line with the Article 33y4) of the Law; and (vi) there is no principled reason to separate the Court of Procedure from cases it has ruled as Court of the 318x>, which the prosecutor cites.

In its ruling, the judge of the preliminary procedure has said that the establishment of an indictment and the launch of procedures against a person is the prosecutor's exclusive right and is subject only to the supervision of the pre-procedure procedure judge for confirmation or not of the charges.

According to her, no law or regulation gives the court authority to instruct the prosecutor to address the judge of the preliminary procedure with a new indictment.

She says that although the alleged acts in this case are procedures related to the war crimes case, that does not mean that this case and that of war crimes are the same cases. According to her, both issues involve different persons, different works, and a different period of time.

The Supreme Court's responsibility to ensure the justice of the procedure and the rights of the accused also does not give him the right to decide whether or not to prosecute acts against justice administration involving four others who are not charged in the 06th case. If that were the case, the judges would act essentially on a case of Article 15ė2, stemming from procedures before them contrary to Article 3350) of the Law”, the decision said.

Presiding procedure judge Masselot has said it is unconvincing the argument of Thaci's defence that the court is unable to guarantee his right to a fair trial and that those rights have already been violated.

This statement, Judge Masseolot has based on the fact that although she is in charge of the case, it does not affect the juro's ability to guarantee Thaci's right judgment in the case of war crimes. She says that the court in the war crimes case has full control over the procedures of that case.

Also, Judge Masselot says it is speculation on the part of Thaci's defence that the court's findings in the war crimes case will make the current case invalid. She says the decision on charges on both issues is different and that the panels conduct their procedures independently.

While, on Thaci's second claim regarding the appointment of the judge of the preliminary procedure, Masseolot says this falls into the scope of the 20th Order Rule over “Exception or Download of Judges”.

Masselot says that in the position of the sole judge, he was appointed to examine the requirements for judicial authorisation and cases related to the prosecution's presentation prior to the establishment of the indictment. While, in the role of the judge of the preliminary procedure, she says she has the ability only to consider the indictment and prepare the case for trial.

The defence claims are also contradictory and incredible when they argue that the impartiality of the Pre-Procedure Procedure Court has been violated by its involvement in investigative cases as the Only Court, while the impartiality of Court II judges is not”, the verdict said.

As a result, both points raised by Thaci were rejected.

Otherwise, Hashim Thaci and Fadil Fazliu have complained of shortcomings in the indictment in the case. While, Thaci has demanded that the procedure be singled out in this case until procedures are completed in his war crimes case.

Otherwise, the Specialised Prosecutor's Office, on September 30th, 2022, has handed over the confirmed amended indictment against Hashim Thaci, Kadri Veselini, Jakup Krasniqi and Rexhep Selimi, which consists of ten points of charges, where the latter are charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity.

On April 29th 2022, the Specialised Prosecutor's Office had handed over a amended indictment to Hashim Thaci, Kadri Wessel, Rexhepi and Jakup Krasniqi, where four indictees have committed war crimes even in Gjilan, Budakov and Semtish.

On November 9th 2020, in their first appearances, Hashim Thaci's Jakup Krasniqi has been declared innocent of the charges placed on them. Wessel has also been declared in his presentation on November 10th, as has Rexhep Selimi on November 11th.

The incident against Hashim Thaci, Kadri Veselin, Rexhep Selimi and Jakup Krasniqi is confirmed on October 26, 2020.

While, in terms of the case against justice administration, 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 first presentation, which was held 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 unprincipled visits of July 2nd, September 9th and October 6th 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.

On February 12th 2025, the prosecution filed a complaint against the confirmed indictment and April 3, 2025 The Court of Appeals decided to return the case to the judge of the preliminary procedure for review.

On April 14, 2025, the court's preliminary procedure changed the verdict in line with Apel's decision and two days later hand it over. Thaci was added to her responsibility for inciting.