The case of former KLA leaders is accepted in evidence by MUP and other Serbian institutions

In Kosovo Specialised Chambers ( DPSK) in The Hague has been made a decision to accept several documents in evidence, at the request of the Specialised Prosecutor's Office (ZPS) in the case of Hashim Thaci, Kadri Veselin, Rexhep Selimi and Jakup Krasniqi.

These documents have been accepted on May 29, 2025, but the decision has been made public on July 25, 2025, reports Justice Vow, Transmitt Periscope

The accepted documents are divided into three polls, which in the latest complaint are mostly documents allegedly obtained from the Serbian State Security Service, Serbia's Interior Ministry and other structures of this state.

As for the procedural aspect, the prosecution on April 14th 2025 had filed a request for accepting some documents that had already not been submitted to any of the requirements submitted at the time.

The prosecution had requested the addition of a nine-minute video and its transcripts to the test list, which was public since March 2023.

While other documents that were submitted for admission into evidence were said to be linked to various charges in the indictment and have provalent values that are not overstepped by any prejudice, and, in addition, support and supplement the testimony of witnesses and evidence already accepted.

The defense had rejected this request, as well as added that the fact that this request was submitted following the testimony of the prosecution's last witness, requires a stricter approach to compliance, and the court must consider that accepting it causes prejudice on defence.

The defense had even stressed that accepting these documents on the grounds that protection could contradict them through presenting its evidence would overturn the burden of evidence and undermine the presumption of innocence.

Defence had also said newspaper articles attributed to action U The CK, which does not quote any source or refer to any credit information, has no provative value.

In addition, the defence claims documents stemming from Serbia require more rigorous assessment to determine credibility.

Many of the documents stemming from the Serbian state have little or no pro-profit value on the charges on this issue”, the decision stressed, defence has said.

As for the video requested to be included in the list of already accepted evidence, the court said that the prosecution had to look for it in earlier stages and that Sʹka presented convincing reasons for the prosecution's doing so.

As a result, the prosecution's request for a change in the list of accepted evidence that, as a result, have been rejected.

For media articles that are documents from 1 to 76, the court has said that the prosecution has indicated that they relate to the role and authority of the accused within the KLA and the Interim Government, the organisation structure and some of the crimes mentioned in the indictment. Some of these articles are provided by the accused and others.

These documents, according to the Court, are copies of articles from international and local media containing authorships, media sources, country, and time of publication, and some also have original photographs. Some of the other documents are clips and transcripts of them with similar content.

The court has said in its ruling that some of the videos may not have been backed up by evidence or even rejected by witnesses who have testified, it does not prevent their acceptance.

The decision says that some of the videos were either downloaded from YouTube or taken by television broadcasters or their archives. In some cases, there are also videos taken from the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. In addition, some videos are said to contain transmitter logos or a transmitter logo. Also, some videos are said to have the date of events on the screen.

As a result, this evidence from 77 to 83 and from 85 to 97 has been accepted in material evidence.

The defence had also rejected some proposed evidence (8 to 11) and that the prosecution said were seized by Jakup Krasniqi.

The court has said the defence claims it was unaware of the exact origin of certain seized evidence, namely, they were seized by a USB found in Krasniqi's portfolio. Consequently, defence opposition was rejected.

The proposed test 1, according to the decision, is a book entitled “Kosovo Liberation Army ʹ documents and articles”. Test 2 is a book containing an interview of Fatmir Limaj.

Evidence 3 to 6 is said to be documents published on a media medium in Kosovo in 2016 and contains the title “War Archies” and includes four volumes from January 4th 1999 onward.

Test 7 is said to be a manuscript by author Jakup Krasniqi with the title “The Great Reverter”. Likewise, the next test is said to be a manuscript prepared by Krasniqi titled “U n The CK at the International Conference of Rambouillet and NATO bombing”.

Test 9 is said to be a draft of an unpublished manuscript called “testified to the KLA war”. The next one was also a manuscript by Krasniqi, titled “Without freedom there is no independence”, and another, entitled “for a sovereign state. There is no sovereignty without integrity”.

Some of the proposed evidence bearing the number 12 is said to be fragments from a book containing Paul Refsdal. The 13th test, however, is said to contain an interview of Wessel.

Test 14 is said to be a book in which Rrustem Mustafa, known as Commander Remi, is from Ilaz Cadoll.

Similarly, evidence 16, 17 and 18 is said to be brochures and books. As a result, the court has found that such evidence does not exceed any prejudice against protection.

“in light of the above, the panel is convinced that Proposed Expos 1-18 are acceptable in line with Rule 138 (1)”, the decision says.

As to the three requirements, evidence proposed from 1 to 14 is said to consist of reports prepared by international organisations. Others are also originally from Serbia.

“E also, evidence 16, 19, 22, 27, 37, 38, 42 and 50 consists of a decision and some orders of Serbian origin (“Locations and Orders”); (ii) Proposed Tests 17, 18, 23, 24, 26, 28-30, 33-36, 39-41, 43-45, 48, 49 and 51 consist of Serbian source reports (<3> expert <x4); (iv) Proposed proof 15, 21, 25, 46, 46 for various Serbian origins (186x6) states in the decision.

According to the court, these documents relate to the continuing hostilities between the KLA and Serbian forces, the existence of a common criminal intention to question and prevent perceived opponents. In addition, these documents are said to be referring to crimes allegedly committed in Prizren, Kletchka, Gjilan, Cahan, Llapushnik, Zlatko, Drenoc, Retimlje, Rahovec, Kukes and Budakov.

Also reportedly, some of the documents speak of the alleged role and authority of Krasniqi and Wessel within the KLA and the Interim Government.

For documents 16 to 18, as well as 20, defense had said that they refer to events that fall outside the period of the indictment. While the court had said it was important for their assessment of the existence of an armed conflict between U. The CK and Serb forces from at least March 1998 to September 1999, as presented in the indictment, and on issues related to the military structure and opposition.

The court had also ascertained the proposed 61 test.

“Defense further claims most documents coming from Serbian authorities do not mention U The CK and neither contain evidence that any of the individuals mentioned in it had any connection with the KLA or acted in accordance with any alleged policy. In this respect, the panel notes that if incidents and individuals mentioned in relevant documents have been linked to the KLA, it will be determined by the panel at the end of the trial, taking into account the whole of the accepted evidence, in line with Rule 139 (2)”, the decision said.

For the 39th test, the decision says it holds the “State Security Department”.

Besides, the Proposed Test 45 is signed. Regarding Proposed Test 51, the panel notes it is composed of [ E REDECT]. For these reasons, the panel is pleased that Serbian reports are authentic facial primma”, the decision said.

While, with some other Serbian documents with numbers -- 25, 32 and 64 -- they are said to be dating, holding a number of references and a title of Serbia's Ministry of Internal Affairs, and identifying the relevant launch authorities. So is document 46. As for the 47 test, it reportedly contains notes on meetings of the so-called “Joint Command of Kosovo and Metohija”.

“Regarding proposed evidence 15, the panel notes: (i) pages K02282 -K0228233 contain cover pages of an operational/war journal; (i) pages K0228234 -K022235 contain two lists offering the names of army officers and encrypted signs used for reporting; and (ii) pages K022-8398 -K022-8405 are dated and signed. Moreover, regarding the proposed test 47, the panel notes that (i) pages 03085485-03085513, 03085568-03085569, 03085559-035561, 03085572-03085575, 03085565, 03085583-035585 and 03085588-035589 hold journals with notes on the meetings of the Joint Command of Kosovo and Metohija, which include dates when they are held as corresponding meetings and names of several participants; and page 030855888558555555589-55898989898989898989; contains notes on the meetings of the Joint Command of Kosovo and Metohija. For these reasons, the panel is convinced that various Serbian documents are authentic facial primma”, the decision said.

Some documents are said to have been seized by UNMIK, which is a diary seized from the residence of a KLA member, Naim Kadriu.

As a result, the decision was made that the SPS would not be allowed to add 84 to existing evidence, from appendix 1 to 83 and 85 to 97 were accepted. In appendix 2 the evidence was accepted from 1 to 18, while documents from 1-51, 53, 54, 57, 58, 61-64, 66, 67 (pages 5, 12 and 13) and 68-80 were accepted.

While, they were refused to accept evidence of appendix 3 with numbers 52, 55, 56, 59, 60, 65 and pages 7 and 9 of the proposed 67 evidence.

Meanwhile, on April 15th 2025, the prosecution has announced that it has completed presenting evidence in the case.

While, the defence had applied according to the 130th Rule, which envisions a request to drop any charges or charges in all in the indictment. The decision on this requirement was made on 16 July 2025. According to the chairman of the panel, Charles Smith III, what he had sought protection was his failure to rely on war crimes claims involving incidents that occurred before May 1998 and after June 20, 1999.

The trial “Trug notes that incidents and events that have occurred at the time opposed by defence are not accusations within the understanding of the 130” rule, the chairman of the court, Charles Smith III, said.

As a result, this motion had been dropped with the reasoning that the court's authority is to bring down material that constitutes accusations involving time causes.

While, the same day, the protection of the victims had presented its evidence, calling two expert witnesses to testify simultaneously.

In addition to testifying on July 16, 2025, the testimony of these two witnesses continued on July 17th 2025, ending the testimony of the victims' defence witnesses.

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 on 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.