The defence of former president Hashim Thaci continues to challenge the legality of the submission of evidence by the Office of the Specialist Prosecutor.
Lead defence counsel, lawyer Luka Misetic, has again responded to the SPO, requesting that it stop submitting evidence after the closure of the case against Hashim Thaci, Kadri Veseli, Rexhep Selimi, and Jakup Krasniqi.
On March 13, he initially asked the Trial Panel to order the prosecution not to present further evidence.
Meanwhile, on March 25, Specialist Prosecutor General Kimberly West responded to the request, asking for it to be dismissed.
The SPO stated that the disclosures in question meet all requirements and “do not constitute the submission of ‘filings’ or ‘presentation of evidence’.”
“The Defence request for an order against the SPO under Rule 136 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence before the Kosovo Specialist Chambers, and disregards the application of Rule 112 and the jurisprudence of the Specialist Chambers in relation to it. The SPO’s fulfilment of its ongoing disclosure obligations, in accordance with the applicable framework, does not constitute the presentation of evidence or submissions within the meaning of Rule 136. The request should therefore be rejected,” the filing states.
However, on March 30, the defence responded, arguing that the SPO’s position is based on a “misinterpretation” and that, “if not changed, it would allow a continued violation of the right to a fair trial.”
“The defence of Mr. Hashim Thaci hereby responds to the SPO filing regarding the Defence Request for an Order under Rule 136 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence before the Kosovo Specialist Chambers. The SPO’s position is based on a misinterpretation of Rules 112 and 136 which, if left uncorrected, would allow a continuing violation of Mr. Thaci’s fundamental right to a fair trial,” the response by defence counsel Luka Misetic states.
The lead defence lawyer for former president Hashim Thaci, through his submissions, expresses concern that unilateral submission of evidence by the SPO does not guarantee a fair process.
“This ‘ex parte’ submission of evidence violates the principle of equality of arms and the right to comment on evidence presented before the trial judge, as guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights (Brandstetter v. Austria), Article 31 of the Constitution, and the law (a decision of the Specialist Chambers Constitutional Court Panel reviewing and confirming the constitutionality of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the Kosovo Specialist Chambers),” the defence submission further states.
Through this response, the defence has again requested the Trial Panel to order the SPO to stop submitting such evidence.
What does Rule 136 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence before the Kosovo Specialist Chambers say?
“After closing statements, the Presiding Judge shall declare the case closed. At this stage, no further submissions may be presented to the Trial Panel, except in special circumstances and upon showing good cause. At this stage, the Trial Panel may not accept any submissions or hear further evidence unless required by special circumstances,” the rule states.
This debate comes after the conclusion of the case against the four former KLA leaders, with the matter now in the hands of the judges for a verdict.
On February 9 this year, closing statements in the Thaci et al. case began at the Specialist Chambers.
On February 18, the four former KLA leaders delivered 20-minute statements, again declaring themselves not guilty of all charges brought by the Specialist Prosecutor’s Office.
The defence teams of Hashim Thaci, Kadri Veseli, Rexhep Selimi, and Jakup Krasniqi have also requested acquittal on all counts of the indictment.
Specialist Prosecutor General Kimberly West has requested sentences of 45 years in prison for each of the former KLA leaders, alleging war crimes.
The trial against them began on April 3, 2023—almost three years after the indictment was confirmed, since when the former KLA leaders have been held in detention in The Hague.
