Mahmut letter to Special Judges: You will remain in human memory, drop the charge for “joint criminal enterprise”

The letter was addressed to judges Charles Smith III, Christoph Barthe, Guénawl Mettraux and Fergal Gaynor, through Chief of the Intelligence Unit and Communication With the Public, Angela Greep.

Mahmut compares the trial process at The Hague to the “Dreamfus affair”, recalling the 120th anniversary of the French Cassation Court ruling that acquitted Captain Alfred Drayfus.

According to him, the Defuse case remains a historic example for jurists regarding the risk of political and institutional influences in judicial decision making. He cites French figures defending the Defuses' innocence, such as Georges Piquuart and Émie Zola, stressing that <x0/Respondence to truth makes you an accomplice to injustice”.

On paper, Mahmut claims that Hashim Thaci, Kadri Veselini, Rexhep Selimi and Jakup Krasniqi are held in custody for five years and eight months “fairly”, while criticising the request of the Prosecutor's Office for sentences of 45 years against each.

He argues that the main pillar of the indictment, which relates to the claim of <x0 joint criminal enterprise”, conflicts with international jurisdiction.

Full letter:

DHOMAVE COSOVA IN HAGIZA

(Through Mrs. Angela Greep, Chief of the Intelligence and Communication Unit

Directed to judges: Charles Smith I II, Christophe Barte, Genel Metro, Fergal Gaynor

Raamweg 47

2596 HN The Hague

The Netherlands

Honourable judges of the court,

At this point on July 12th 2026, when you are working on drafting the decision on the court against Hashim Thaci, Kadri Veselini, Rexhep Selimi and Jakup Krasniqi, France commemorated the 120th anniversary of the Cassation Court's decision declaring Captain Alfred Deyfus innocence.

As a lawyer in the Western states, you have to know well “Dreamfus”, not only as one of the most serious mistakes in the history of the court processes in Western Europe, but also as one of the fundamental pillars of professional ethics, which jurists rely on, to avoid political, ideological or institutional influences in bringing decisions.

For a lawyer, “Qreyfus” reminds him, on the one hand, of the military court's decision to condemn an innocent man on the basis of an alleged indictment because of his ethnic (Hebrew) affiliation and, in turn, the intellectual courage of some prominent French personalities.

Even today, on the 120th anniversary of Alfred Deyfus' complete innocence, the jurists ' collective memories have remained the names of Émilien Maurel (Judge Court) Ernest Deleuze, Joseph Prieur, and other military court officers who condemned an innocent man!

But in the collective memory of intellectuals in many different fields of knowledge, there has remained great respect for the courage of Lieutenant Colonel Georges Picquist, then the chief of counterintelligence, who, after revealing the evidence of the innocence of Defuse, laid down the truth and the law on institutional interest (the military and the state). Neither degradation, transfer, nor imprisonment prevented Colonel Picquated from enlightenment.

It will remain forever in the memory of humanity, Emil Zola's public letter (“Yaccuse...” I accuse, to the president of the French Republic, Félix Faure, in which he publicly accused military leaders and state authorities of unjustly condemning Alfred Drayfus, hiding all evidence of his innocence.

The famous writer Emil Zola did not back away after the slander, nor after the sentence, nor after the obligation to emigrate to England because he had placed his entire intellectual talent and fame in the service of justice.

I can continue with the stand of journalist Georges Clemenzaau, who later became head of the Council of Ministers, philosopher and politician Jean Yaurès, Antole France, Marcel Proust, and many other personalities who risked themselves to defend the truth because the silence of the truth does accomplice in injustice.

Besides the intellectuals who raised their voices against the court's mounted process against Alfred Drayfus, the names of Alexis Ballot-Beaupré, Clément Moras, Manuel-Achille Baudein, Alfonse Bard, Jean-Pierre Manau, and the juries of the U.S. Court of Cassation, who, on July 12, 1906, brought the verdict of Alfred Dreyfus's complete innocence.

Honourable judges of the court,

On December 22, 1894 Alfred Defuses was sentenced to life in prison for high treason. After being held in prison four years and four months. The reactions of numerous intellectual personalities had great influence and forced the military court to find relief circumstances on September 9, 1899 and reduce the sentence to 10 years in prison”. But lowering the sentence did not reduce the French public opinion revolt over the injustice. Ten days later, the then President of the Republic of France, Émille Loubet, announced forgiveness for Alfred Drayfus and released him from prison. But forgiveness would not wipe out the punishment. It took 12 years to finally declare Alfred Defuse's complete innocence to the United Chamber of Cassation Court of France

Honourable judges of the court,

Albanian public opinion and prominent personalities across the earthly globe are aware of the fact that Hashim Thaci, Kadri Veselin, Rexhep Selimi and Jakup Krasniqi were unjustly kept behind bars for 5 years and 8 months.

The Specialised Prosecutor's Office, on the basis of charges filed by Serbia's Secret Service, which has been a warring party with the Kosovo Liberation Army, has demanded a 45-year sentence on each of them, which in other words, is a life sentence!

The court process you're running is of historic importance that exceeds the size of “issue Dreamfus”.

Whatever your decision, you will remain in human memory.

As far as I'm concerned, until the verdict is declared, I stand in hope that the main pillar of prosecution claiming the aforementioned indictees were leaders of a “joint criminal enterprise aimed at establishing their political power and controlling the entire territory of Kosovo”, you will be aware of the international jurisdiction on this issue.

The jurisdiction of the Sierra Leone Special Court, founded by the UN Security Council with Resolution 13151, of August 14, 2000, was to try crimes against humanity and serious violations of the International Humanitarian Law, which had been committed in this state since November 1996. But in the final decision, the court rejected the prosecutor's claims to label the rebels as members of a “joint criminal enterprise” and brought the decision that, “according to the court statute, taking political power and placing control over the entire territory of Sierra Leone, especially in areas where the diamond mines were, is not a criminal goal under the International Court statute. There is no nor does there be any rate in International Law that prohibits revolt”

(https://www.refworld.org/jusprudence/caselaw/scl/scl/2007n/91904, pp. 40 and f. 67. )

Even in the case of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, we have the same charge.

While the Kosovo Liberation Army's political project was the liberation of the country from Serbia and the establishment of a democratic state, propaganda of Slobodan Milosevic's regime tried to present the KLA's liberation war as a criminal project.

Although Carla Del Ponte was aware of the courses of the trial at the Sierra Leone Special Court and the complete failure the prosecutor experienced, who tried to use the “joint criminal enterprise” in the indictment against the rebels of the Revolutionary Council of Armed Forces in that state, she did not take into account the jurisdiction of this court. In the charges against Fatmir Limaj, Haradin Balaj and Isak Muslius (2003) and the one against Ramush Haradinaj, Lahi Brahimaj and Idriz Balaj (2005) used the terminology “joint criminal enterprise” that was invented by Serbia's Secret Service in the function of distorting the political goal of the liberation war,

But her attempt to criminalise our war failed because: in both cited court processes, in final decisions the court declared the complete innocence of Fatmir Limaj and Ramush Haradinaj and dismissed the claim to present it as unconfirmed U n CK as “joint criminal enterprise”.

Based on these decisions of jurisdiction of the above-mentioned courts, I have the full conviction that the lawyer with an ethical professional integrity will dismiss as groundless claims by the Prosecutor's Office for allegedly “joint criminal enterprise” of the Kosovo Liberation Army.

Honourable judges of the court,

Besides rulings of the above-mentioned courts, jurisdiction that can't avoid any lawyers, you are witnesses that in the judicial process you led you came to witness prominent personalities with international credibility.

The evidence of James Rubin, Paul Williams, John Duncan, Jack Covey, Christopher Hill, Michael Durkee and Wesley Clark will remain in human memory as the maximum attempt to help Kosovo's Specialised Chambers not make a mistake in condemning innocent people.

It is in your conscience that you will give guidance in the judicial process that will remain in history. Announcing Hashim Thaci's complete innocence, Kadri Veselin, Rexhep Selimi and Jakup Krasniqi in this court process of historic importance, you will remain in humanity's memory in the same quality as members of the UN Court of the Cassation Court of France, who, on July 12, 1906, brought the verdict on the complete innocence of Alfred Dreyfus.

Respectfully

Bardhil Mahmut

(Politologist and writer)

Switzerland, Wevey, July 12, 2026