Following the Hague ruling, Hyseni calls for political restraint and avoidance of hate speech

The judgment announced on 16 September 2026 by the Kosovo Specialist Chambers in The Hague against Hashim Thaçi, Kadri Veseli, Rexhep Selimi and Jakup Krasniqi has prompted numerous reactions in Kosovo.

The court’s decision provides for prison sentences of 25 years for Hashim Thaçi and Jakup Krasniqi, 18 years for Kadri Veseli and 13 years for Rexhep Selimi. All four were found guilty of several criminal offenses, while they were acquitted of other charges.

Commentator Nehat Hyseni, speaking to “Bota sot,” says that the response to this decision should take place within institutional and legal frameworks. In his view, statements that could deepen social divisions should be avoided.

Hyseni says that any assessment of the severity of the sentences should be based on the full text and reasoning of the judgment.

He says that describing the sentences as “excessive” is a position that can be defended by the defense teams, families, political supporters and public opinion, with reference to their length, the individual circumstances of the defendants, the nature of the criminal responsibility and comparison with the standards of international jurisprudence.

According to him, the judgment should be read and analyzed in its entirety, with particular attention to the court’s reasoning.

Hyseni recalls that the Kosovo Specialist Chambers were established by Kosovo law and are headquartered in The Hague. He adds that the proceedings before this court guarantee the parties the right to a defense and an appeal.

The commentator underlines that the decision should primarily be challenged through legal remedies and not only through political reactions.

He stresses that the defense may challenge the findings of guilt, the way the evidence was assessed, individual responsibility and the sentence, in accordance with the applicable rules.

Hyseni warns that political divisions and the use of the war issue for partisan clashes could weaken the response of Kosovo’s institutions.

According to him, the consequences of the judgment could affect the entire political spectrum, while mutual accusations, deep divisions and the instrumentalization of the history of the war make it more difficult to create a unified institutional response.

He calls on the Assembly of Kosovo, the President, the Government, political parties, war associations and justice institutions to act with constitutional and national responsibility.

Hyseni explains that a common position does not necessarily mean an identical interpretation of the judgment. According to him, the institutional minimum should include respect for the rights of the accused and convicted, support for their families and legal defense, institutional transparency, preservation of the dignity of victims, protection of the memory of the KLA’s liberation war, and opposition to revenge, violence or hate speech.

He underlines that the unity of political forces should not be interpreted as obstructing democratic debate. On the contrary, this unity should be linked to protecting the state of Kosovo, respecting the liberation war, demanding impartial justice and making use of all legal avenues.

According to Hyseni, the parties may have differing positions on governance, the economy, dialogue with Serbia or relations with international allies. However, he believes that the protection of fundamental rights and the functioning of justice institutions should not be used as tools of partisan warfare.

The commentator calls for a coordinated response from the institutions following the announcement of the judgment. The President, the Assembly and the Government, he says, can request institutional clarifications, support the right of appeal and ensure the necessary assistance for the families of those convicted.

At the same time, Hyseni believes that statements that could be seen as pressure on the court or as a denial of victims’ rights should be avoided.

He stresses that a democratic state is demonstrated not only through opposition to a judgment, but also through respect for the law and the functioning of justice institutions, particularly in matters that are most sensitive for the country.

Nehat Hyseni believes that the sentences handed down to Hashim Thaçi, Kadri Veseli, Rexhep Selimi and Jakup Krasniqi have opened a new phase of debate about the KLA’s war, international justice and the individual responsibility of its former leaders.

According to him, a large proportion of Kosovo’s citizens consider these sentences severe and see them as a blow against figures associated with the liberation of the country. This perception, Hyseni says, must be heard, but the legal challenge must be based on evidence, arguments and procedures.

He concludes that Kosovo needs institutional unity, political calm and social solidarity so that the dignity of the liberation war, the rights of those convicted, the memory of the victims and the democratic future of the state can all be protected simultaneously.