The Kosovo war has for years been told through history, politics and collective memory. Soon, that narrative will also gain a judicial dimension.
In The Hague, the Specialist Chambers — also known as the Special Court — are expected to deliver a verdict on four former leaders of the Kosovo Liberation Army: Hashim Thaçi, Kadri Veseli, Jakup Krasniqi and Rexhep Selimi.
Të lidhura
None found
They face charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity, allegedly committed during and immediately after the war in Kosovo.
The initial deadline set for the announcement of the ruling was May 19. However, citing the complexity of the case, the Trial Panel postponed it until July 20, 2026.
Even that date is not necessarily considered final.
In a response to Radio Free Europe, the Specialist Chambers said the planned deadlines could change again.
“The judges may decide on another postponement, if it is considered absolutely necessary. As soon as the panel sets a date for the delivery of the judgment, we will make it known,” the response said.
Thaçi and his three co-defendants — all major KLA figures during the 1998 and 1999 war — have been held in detention in The Hague since November 2020, when the indictment against them was made public.
According to that indictment, they are presented as part of a “joint criminal enterprise” aimed at seizing and exercising control through intimidation, mistreatment and the removal of opponents.
The document says the victims included Serbs, Roma and Albanians who did not support the KLA. At least 102 people are suspected to have been killed, while more than 20 remain missing.
The prosecution also argues that, because of their leadership roles, the accused bear responsibility for crimes committed by their subordinates as well.
Now, more than three years after the trial began, the trial panel has heard dozens of witnesses and reviewed hundreds of pieces of evidence presented by both the prosecution and the defense.
At the end of the proceedings, the prosecution asked for 45 years in prison for each of the four accused.
“The Specialist Prosecutor’s Office has requested convictions on all ten counts of the indictment and the imposition of a single 45-year sentence, based on individual contributions to the crimes…,” Specialist Prosecutor Kimberly West said on February 9, 2026.
All four have rejected the charges.
Hashim Thaçi, who over the years served as Kosovo’s prime minister and president, has called them “completely untrue, absurd and deeply offensive.”
“It is a painful truth that this prosecution is trying to dismiss the testimony in this court of senior officials from NATO, the United States of America, Great Britain and the UN — theirs and their people who were with us on the ground the whole time,” Thaçi told the court on February 18, 2026.
Several of the best-known names in Western diplomacy and security from the wartime period testified in support of the defense, including former U.S. State Department spokesman James Rubin and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe Wesley Clark.
According to their testimony, the KLA did not function as a centralized structure, and the accused had less influence and control than is claimed in the indictment.
This view is also shared by a large part of Kosovo’s citizens, who continue to see Thaçi and his fellow fighters as figures of the liberation war.
From time to time, protests have also been held against the trial, which some regard as unfair and one-sided.
For some of them, including political representatives, the fact that the court has focused only on the alleged crimes of KLA members creates the impression of equating Kosovo’s war with the crimes committed by Serbia, which was the aggressor state during the 1998-1999 war.
Attention is now on the judges and the ruling they will deliver.
Even among lawyers and researchers who have closely followed the case, there is no single expectation. Some expect acquittals, others do not want to make predictions, while some see more than one possible outcome.
Artan Qerkini, a lawyer licensed before the Specialist Chambers, believes the prosecution has failed to prove the two main foundations of the indictment: the existence of a joint criminal enterprise and the command responsibility of the accused. For that reason, he expects all four to be acquitted.
“The Kosovo Liberation Army was a volunteer army and did not have a strict hierarchy. Its members joined of their own free will, they were not professional soldiers and had no obligation to remain in the war until the end. In such circumstances, it cannot be said that effective control existed on the ground, which is one of the bases for determining a joint criminal enterprise,” Qerkini told Radio Free Europe’s Expose program.
But not everyone is inclined to draw a final conclusion before the verdict.
William Schabas, a professor of International Law at Middlesex University in London, says such proceedings are often determined by certain details of the evidence, which are not always visible to the public.
“The judges examining this case are not from Kosovo. They are not detached from Kosovo’s political reality, because it is part of the case being tried. But they are independent and impartial. I think the concerns or sensitivities their decision may cause do not affect their work — they will decide on the basis of the facts and evidence before them,” Schabas told Expose.
Nevenka Tromp, a long-time scholar of the Hague Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and a close observer of the proceedings against Thaçi and the others, does not rule out any outcome.
According to her, there are three possible scenarios: acquittal for all four, conviction for all four, or an intermediate outcome in which some are convicted and some are released.
It is precisely this third option that she considers the most likely.
“This court will have to preserve a kind of balance between the expectations of the Serbian side and the Kosovar side. For that reason, it is likely that some defendants will be acquitted and some convicted. It remains to be seen whether one will be released or one convicted … or some other combination. But there will be compromise,” Tromp told Expose.
However, Tromp does not limit her assessment only to the outcome of the trial. She says serious concerns emerged during the proceedings about procedural standards, including the length of pretrial detention and the way the presumption of innocence was applied. According to her, similar criticism has also been made by the Bar Council of England and Wales.
The preliminary report of that body, published on May 11, expressed concern about the length of detention, restrictions on temporary release, the admission of evidence and equality between the prosecution and the defense during the trial.
It remains unclear how much these criticisms will affect the way the verdict is received. For some experts, the ruling is only one part of the story; the other begins after it is announced, through the way it is read and interpreted in Kosovo and beyond.
This is also where sociologist and University of London professor Eric Gordy focuses.
According to him, one of the greatest weaknesses of the Specialist Chambers has been communication with the public. Instead of explaining more clearly to citizens that the matter concerned individual responsibility, the public space was filled with political interpretations, in which the trial was presented as a confrontation between warring sides rather than a criminal proceeding against individuals.
“Who would not want to achieve historical justice? But I would like the judges to focus more on legal justice, while historians and philosophers deal with historical justice,” Gordy told Expose.
Gordy does not believe the verdict will produce a shared narrative about the war in Kosovo. On the contrary, he thinks interpretations will continue to vary, as they are built on experience, collective memory and different political and social perspectives.
For that reason, he considers dialogue between the societies themselves the most reliable path for confronting the past.
“We need to separate history from politics and encourage a dialogue in which people in each state also talk about the responsibilities of those who represented them. Dividing people into heroes and enemies serves no one,” Gordy said.
Schabas also expresses skepticism toward the idea that a judicial ruling can bring reconciliation.
Referring to the experience of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, he says that after dozens of judgments and more than two decades of work, its impact in bringing the societies of the region closer together has remained limited.
According to Schabas, something similar may happen after the Specialist Chambers’ ruling.
“If the verdict is against them, there will be people who will not accept it easily. Simply because of their loyalty and convictions, not because of a cold and impartial assessment of the law,” he said.
For Qerkini, a guilty verdict would have an impact that goes beyond individual responsibility. He stresses that the fact the court has dealt only with the alleged crimes of the KLA has fueled the perception of selective justice, which could also affect how Kosovo’s war is viewed.
“It could negatively affect perceptions of the KLA, because those accused are the KLA’s leaders. The KLA was not made up of weaponry and logistics, but of people. And these accused people were the KLA’s leaders and, inevitably, the entire KLA could be criminalized,” Qerkini said.
Tromp goes even further, saying that not only the perception of the KLA is at stake.
According to her, a guilty verdict could also affect how Kosovo’s statehood is narrated in the international arena, giving Serbia and skeptical countries more room to challenge the moral legitimacy of its liberation war.
She assesses that this could place Kosovo in a more difficult position in diplomatic efforts for recognition and in relations with international partners.
“Kosovo’s society wants to be accepted in the European political context. It wants to move forward and build its future. But this process risks keeping it tied to the past and calling into question the good intentions and the result this court aims to achieve,” Tromp said.
The Special Court, established by Kosovo’s Assembly, is part of the country’s judicial system, but operates in The Hague with international judges.
It was set up after the 2010 report by former Swiss senator Dick Marty, which raised allegations of serious crimes by former KLA members, including organ trafficking.
Since the latter were not proven and are not part of the current indictment against Thaçi and the others, Qerkini says Kosovo was “deceived.”
