Doubts over release of the KLA four: Adnan Qaka analyzes judicial decision and destabilizing rhetoric

Just hours before the Specialist Court was to announce its verdict for the former leaders of the Kosovo Liberation Army, analyst Adnan Qaka voiced strong skepticism about the possibility of their release at first instance. According to him, regardless of what is initially decided, the judicial process could continue through appeal mechanisms.

In an interview for “Bota sot,” Qaka assessed that the 16 September ruling is likely to be unfavorable for the accused, but recalled that they enjoy the right to appeal. Even if they are declared not guilty at the first instance, the process does not end there, because the Prosecution has the possibility to challenge the judgment at a higher level.

The analyst stressed that the prosecution has requested 45 years in prison for each defendant, relying on the evidence administered during the trial. He added that the court will weigh this evidence to determine guilt or innocence, and highlighted a key aspect: any eventual sentence is individual in nature and does not tarnish the image of the Kosovo Liberation Army as an organization.

Qaka called pure fabrications the claims that a conviction would undermine Kosovo’s statehood or would be considered a conviction of the KLA itself. He stressed that these voices are completely unfounded.

Regarding the notice from the United States Embassy in Pristina, which called on American citizens to be cautious because of possible protests and road blockages, Qaka warned that these signals must be taken seriously. According to him, any escalation of the situation in Kosovo would serve the Serbian agenda.

The analyst interpreted the alarm raised by the embassy and some Western media as an indication that at least some of the accused may receive a sentence on 16 September, which could bring unrest. He stressed that Serbia is very active on the ground, aiming to repeat the scenario of the March 2004 riots, and is seeking every chance to exercise military aggression against Kosovo.

Qaka also expressed concern about the harsh rhetoric of some former KLA members and political figures, who have threatened destabilization in the event of a conviction. He warned that precisely these promises of chaos, at the delicate moment the country is going through, could offer Belgrade the justification to intervene, just as in the March 2004 events.

He singled out statements by MPs Ganimete Musliu and Mërgim Lushtaku, as well as by Alliance for the Future of Kosovo member Daut Haradinaj, as examples of rhetoric that fuels tensions. Especially Musliu’s words, according to him, were scandalous and unfounded when she suggested that NATO would also bear responsibility for the support it gave to the war in the event of a conviction.

As for calls to arm the population, Qaka took a firm stance: instead of distributing weapons to citizens, Kosovo should strengthen its own defense capacities and intensify cooperation with KFOR. He expressed support for compulsory military service for at least six months, but stressed that calls for arming at this stage of tension are illogical and could lead to internal clashes, even civil conflict.

Repeating his long-standing skepticism, Qaka described the Specialist Court as “the Illusions of the Special Court,” arguing that a mono-ethnic court that tries only Albanians cannot bring full justice for war crimes and the post-war period in Kosovo. He also called on those expecting the punishment of political killings not to harbor illusions, because this expectation will also remain unfulfilled.

In conclusion, the analyst appealed for restraint and unity, stressing that the court’s verdict should be awaited calmly and respected through institutional channels. He closed the interview with the observation that the judicial process is complicated and does not end with what the majority desires; therefore, he considered absurd the claims of a quick release on 16 September, inviting citizens to accept whatever decision the court makes.