The Head of the Special Committee justifies not holding the conference in Pristina
Express newspaper
07/06/2025 22:21
The President of the Specialist Chambers, Ekaterina Trendafilova, spoke about the trial process in The Hague. She also mentioned the protest of KLA veterans, who opposed her conference. According to Trendafilova, the protest proved that the European Union was right to hold the trials of former KLA leaders outside Kosovo.
On May 13, she had planned to speak about the developments at the Specialist Chambers in The Hague, in the trial of Hashim Thaçi, Kadri Veseli, Jakup Krasniqi and Rexhep Selim. However, the protest of the Kosovo Liberation Army veterans changed her plans. The head of the Specialist Chambers, Ekaterina Trendafilova, spoke about this in an interview with Radio Television of Kosovo.
The first of the Specials justified not holding the conference in Pristina, saying that she could not tolerate violence.
“The press conference was canceled upon the recommendation of the Kosovo Police. Despite my sincere commitment to meeting with journalists in person, I cannot do so if someone’s safety is at risk. I do not tolerate violence during a press conference that is intended to inform the people of Kosovo openly about us. This hostility, which was intended to prevent a peaceful and transparent meeting and discussion, further explains and justifies the reason why Kosovo and the EU made an agreement for these trials to be held outside of Kosovo. It is regrettable when a lack of respect for the rule of law is seen,” Trendafilova said.
She also commented on the criticism of the judicial process against Thaçi and others, saying that the accusations of injustice are unfounded.
“I would describe the process as safe for witnesses, although there were attempts to influence witnesses or intimidate them. I consider that the Court is administering justice in a fair, impartial and independent manner. Regarding the criticism in the Kosovo media that you mentioned, I have noticed and taken those critical comments very seriously. For example, it has been falsely stated that a person cannot be held in detention awaiting trial for longer than one year,” Trendafilova said.
The Presiding Judge also spoke about the defendants’ request for provisional release, which was denied despite the conclusion of the Prosecution’s witnesses.
“Judges are completely independent in their decisions and no one can interfere with their decision-making. You are referring to previous decisions regarding requests for provisional release, for which judges of a panel made decisions based on an assessment of whether there was a risk of flight, witness tampering or the commission of other criminal offences. To date, all three judges have concluded that the release should not have been granted, based on the assessment of these risks,” Trendafilova said.
Asked about the investigation of the four in The Hague, Trëndafilova said that they are being tried as individuals, not as an organization.
“The Specialist Chambers deal only with the investigation and prosecution of persons in relation to allegations of their unlawful actions, that is, their individual criminal responsibility. So, the Specialist Chambers hold only individuals, not organizations, accountable. This means that if in the courtroom KLA members who are alleged to have committed criminal offences are mentioned as individuals, this only concerns the persons as individuals and not the entire organization,” Trendafilova said.
As for when this trial is expected to conclude with a first-instance decision, Trëndafilova did not give a specific deadline.
“Regarding your question about the conclusion of the trial, it is still too early to predict when the verdict will be pronounced in this court case. The defense teams have announced that they will file a joint motion to dismiss the charges and we will have to wait to see what the trial panel will decide on their motion. Next, depending on the outcome of the motion, if the charges are not dismissed, the victims’ counsel is expected to present his evidence and arguments, which will take approximately a week,” she said.
On June 2, the defense was scheduled to submit a motion to dismiss the indictment, but this deadline was postponed due to the acceptance of some new Prosecution evidence by the trial panel.
aaaaa