PDK proposes changes to the Specialist Chambers, experts: The mandate is not affected, focus should be on the Appeals Court

PDK Chairman Bedri Hamza announced on Monday that the party’s parliamentary group had submitted to the Assembly a bill amending and supplementing the law governing the Kosovo Specialist Chambers in The Hague.

According to Hamza, the initiative was launched at a time when public debate in Kosovo over the proceedings against former Kosovo Liberation Army leaders has intensified, particularly following protests against the verdict handed down against them.

The PDK has said that the initiative aims to address issues related to the functioning of the Specialist Chambers and the conduct of judicial proceedings.

The Alliance has supported the initiative, while LVV has announced that it will carefully analyze the PDK’s proposal. According to LVV, it must be assessed whether the amendments comply with the legal framework and what impact they would have on the proceedings currently taking place in The Hague.

LVV has also called for the Constitutional Court’s decision on the constitution of the Assembly to be awaited first, emphasizing that the issue requires a coordinated institutional and state-level approach.

The PDK proposal is expected to revive discussions in the Assembly about how the Specialist Court functions, at a time when judicial developments in The Hague continue to be part of Kosovo’s political and social debate.

Lama: The Specialist Court cannot be dismantled through a legislative initiative

Former ambassador Alma Lama told “Bota sot” that the Specialist Chambers cannot be abolished through an initiative to amend the law.

She said that efforts should focus on the Appeals Court, which, in her view, could lead to sentences being reduced or overturned if they prove to be unfounded.

“The PDK knows very well that the Specialist Court cannot be dismantled. A legislative initiative will not produce results, since it would require an amendment to the Constitution. This would require two-thirds of the votes of the deputies and two-thirds of the votes of the representatives of the communities, that is, a double majority.

Moreover, Kosovo also has international obligations. For this reason, the focus should be on the Appeals Court, which can reduce or overturn the sentences if they are not supported by evidence,” Lama declared.

According to her, the creation of the Specialist Court was a demand of the international community, particularly the United States of America and the European Union. Lama also criticized the lengthy investigations and the severity of the sentences.

Alma Lama said that Kosovo must continue its engagement through international justice and diplomatic action.

“The Specialist Court was never a joke, but a decisive demand of the international community, specifically the United States and the EU, which supported the Council of Europe.

The sentences are severe, while the investigations have taken far too long. Moreover, the allegation of organ trafficking was not part of the investigation, as it was understood from the outset that this was a monstrous fabrication by Serbia and Russia.

Kosovo’s battle must continue, but within the international justice system and on the diplomatic front,” she declared.

Burjani: The main problem concerns the way the trials are conducted

Jurist Blerim Burjani told “Bota sot” that the mandate of the Specialist Court is clearly defined, but expressed concerns about the way the trials are conducted.

According to him, the most problematic issues concern the court’s impartiality, the assessment and administration of evidence, and the need for the proceedings to be based on fair judicial standards.

“The mandate is clear, while the concern relates to the judges. The law cannot change its mandate or powers, since it remains a court. The main issue is the way the trials are conducted: how fair the process is, how the evidence has been assessed and administered, and how it has been classified.

This is where the main problem lies. This court has raised concerns regarding its impartiality. It does not appear to operate normally or on the basis of material or formal evidence. There are many problems in the way it has approached the proceedings against the four defendants.

The demand is for proper justice and decisions based on evidence, not for the evasion or politicization of the judicial process,” Burjani emphasized.

The jurist also expressed doubts about the standards followed during the trials, calling for an independent and impartial process.

“The doubts concern judicial standards and fundamental principles. It must be seen whether we are dealing with a court conducting a fair trial or with a manipulated and biased institution.

The damage was largely done at the first instance, through draconian and absurd judgments. It is now hoped that the Appeals Court will be more professional and impartial.

The basic demand is the implementation of the principles of independent justice, since trust in this court is lacking. The law may be changed, but its mission cannot be changed, because it remains the clarification of suspicions concerning war crimes,” he said.

Burjani added that monitoring the Specialist Court, as mentioned by the PDK, would not bring significant changes. According to him, the defense should focus on the work of the lawyers and securing new facts for the proceedings before the Appeals Court.

“The monitoring mentioned by the PDK has no effect on this court. The law can be changed only cosmetically, and not to the extent that it would bring substantial changes. Only dismantling it would save the fighters in The Hague, while everything else is largely political.

What is now needed is effective defense by the lawyers and the collection of as many facts as possible that may have been missing at the first instance. The process must be turned in favor of the parties convicted at the first instance,” Burjani concluded to “Bota sot”.