The Specialist Chambers in The Hague plans to conclude the closing-statement phase in the second case against former President Hashim Thaçi, Bashkim Smakaj, Hajredin Kuçi, Isni Kilaj and Fadil Fazliu by September 14. The deadline was announced in a document published on the court’s official website.

According to the schedule presented by the judicial institution, the parties are expected to deliver their closing statements on September 10, 11 and 14. This is considered one of the final stages of the trial.

The implementation of this plan will also depend on the progress of Bashkim Smakaj’s testimony, scheduled for August 17, 18 and 19. If the testimony concludes within the allotted time, the court intends to proceed with closing statements on the scheduled dates.

The case has drawn significant public interest because it involves prominent figures from Kosovo’s political and institutional life. Once the closing statements have concluded, the way will be cleared for the phase in which the trial panel will issue its verdict.

The post The Hague Sets Deadline for Closing Statements in Second Case Against Hashim Thaçi appeared first on Albeu.com.

Former Speaker of the Parliament of Kosovo, Jakup Krasniqi, in an exclusive conversation with Radio Television of Kosovo from his detention cell in The Hague, expresses his unwavering conviction that on September 16 justice will illuminate the righteous character of the KLA conflict. He also shares his views on the trial, the political scene in the country, family ties, and his message for the youth. The full interview will be broadcast after the central news on RTK.

Awaiting the conclusion of one of the most talked-about post-war legal processes, Jakup Krasniqi speaks for the first time exclusively from the detention facilities. The former legislative leader discusses extensively the progress of the trial, hopes for the September verdict, longing for his loved ones, the political landscape in Kosovo, and the legacy he aims to bequeath to future generations.

Krasniqi is convinced that the conclusion of this case against him and his co-accused Hashim Thaçi, Kadri Veseli, and Rexhep Selimi will legitimize the justice of the Kosovo Liberation Army’s fight.

“I am deeply convinced that when every piece of evidence is analyzed, the truth will emerge and just how pure our war was will receive the deserved confirmation. I had the privilege and immense pride of serving as the voice of the KLA. My instruments were the pen and communication; with them I showed the democratic world the reality and the suffering of my nation. I believe with all my soul that this judiciary will serve history by documenting that our resistance was an honest, unblemished, and absolutely necessary cause for freedom,” he stated.

When asked about the country’s political situation, he urged leaders to raise the national interest above partisan ones and to remember the blood shed for the foundations of the Republic of Kosovo.

“Building a state is never a simple journey, therefore my message to current leaders is that positions and governments come and go, but Kosovo is eternal. Along this path, it must not be allowed to forget the extraordinary human cost invested in our institutions. Kosovo has no room for unnecessary internal clashes or shallow clan agendas. Our challenges, whether domestic or in the international and geostrategic arena, require a multi-year visionary plan that transcends the four-year horizons of power,” he emphasized.

Krasniqi, held in The Hague since November 2020, also has a touching message for his sons, daughters and grandchildren who were born during his isolation.

“I want my descendants to know that the independence they enjoy was not a random gift, its price is still being paid. My guidance for them is simple: never compromise their conscience and dignity, regardless of pressures or possible rewards. This physical distance will come to an end, but what remains forever is the honor and unsullied name that we bequeath to you,” he said.

In the full account, the only one Jakup Krasniqi has given from the detention center, he also discusses the perception of the KLA, relations with the international factor, existence behind bars, and hopes for the September 16 verdict.

The post From The Hague, Jakup Krasniqi: The September 16 verdict will prove the justice of the liberation war appeared first on Albeu.com.

Former President of Kosovo, Vjosa Osmani, has brought back to attention July 22, 2010, a symbolic day when the International Court of Justice (ICJ) confirmed that Kosovo’s declaration of independence did not constitute a violation of international law.

In a social media post accompanied by photos from that time, Osmani described it as the moment when Serbia suffered defeat at the International Court of Justice.

“July 22, 2010, The Hague. Gratitude to the entire team with whom we worked together for this historic result for our Republic,” she expressed in her message, while also sharing images from The Hague to recall the advisory opinion that remains a cornerstone in strengthening Kosovo’s position in the international arena.

The post Osmani recalls The Hague victory: Publishes images from ICJ decision on Kosovo appeared first on Albeu.com.

During this meeting, according to Mazrekaj, Dedaj had forcefully affirmed that he was detained and physically assaulted by Hashim Thaçi and some other individuals during the war period.

Relying on that account, Mazrekaj offered him the opportunity to express himself openly through the newspaper “Bota Sot” and to publish his claims about what he said he had experienced.

“For a long time he continued to write and speak against Thaçi and his circle. Later, he accepted functions and benefits from precisely those structures which he had earlier accused,” Mazrekaj wrote.

He also brought attention to Dedaj’s later testimony before the Specialist Chambers in The Hague, where the latter had said that in most of the claims made after the war “he had not been normal” and that he had exaggerated some of them excessively.

“This photo for me does not simply represent a memory. It testifies how deeply an individual’s statements and positions can change, depending on interests, positions, and circumstances,” Mazrekaj concluded.

The post Photo of post-war meeting in Zurich published, Mazrekaj recounts how Gjergj Dedaj had told him about being beaten by Thaçi and his testimony in The Hague appeared first on Albeu.com.

The court explained that setting this date is linked to the large volume of evidence and the complexity of the procedure, which requires a full and well-reasoned review of the case.

Lawyer Blerim Bujrani also spoke about the postponement, assessing that the decision is precisely linked to the large amount of evidence and the need for the case to be analyzed carefully.

He stresses that the prolongation of proceedings and lengthy pretrial detention damage the credibility of the justice system, while expressing the expectation that the final decision will be acquittal.

“The court can make this postponement based on the volume of materials, testimonies and evidence that have been presented. The intention is to slow down the process of issuing the verdict for reasons of greater certainty in decision-making.

Second, the court is obliged to decide with a verdict within a proper timeframe, without deviation, meaning a reasonable procedural time as a principle of international justice or based on international human rights conventions. Therefore, basic human rights must not be violated.

This court has not really enjoyed any trust anyway, especially I am speaking about Kosovar professionals. This court has acted more as an international one than a domestic one.

Lengthy pretrial detention undermines the credibility of the judiciary in general. I think the verdict should have been announced earlier so that the other procedures could move forward properly, but what seems important now is for there to be an acquittal verdict, and that is why the defense or the lawyers for the parties are remaining silent. They want to see a normal acquittal decision, without problems and appeals in the other procedural stages,” he told the newspaper “Bota sot”.

The post Lawyer explains the reasons for the postponement of the verdict and the effects of this delay appeared first on Albeu.com.

In a post on X, he stated: “The Appeals Panel of the Specialist Chambers in the contempt of court trial against Hashim Thaçi has just granted yet another Prosecution appeal.”

In the same reaction, Misetic also made public the balance of appeals in the two cases.

He wrote: “Prosecution appeals: 3 out of 3 granted (100% success). Defense appeals: 44 out of 44 rejected (100% failure).”

According to Misetic, after the end of the Specialist Chambers’ mandate, this court should undergo an evaluation process.

He also stressed: “When the Kosovo Specialist Chambers are subjected to an inevitable assessment after the end of their mandate, judicial fairness will be one of the main topics of debate.”

The post Luka Misetic raises questions about the impartiality of the Specialist Chambers appeared first on Albeu.com.

In an interview with Radio Free Europe, Tromp said the ruling is expected to take the form of a compromise, aimed at meeting the expectations of both the Kosovar and the Serbian sides.

According to her, the outcome will be such that some of the accused will be acquitted, while others will be found guilty and sentenced.

She stressed that it remains to be seen what final combination the court will decide on.

The trial of Hashim Thaçi, Kadri Veseli, Jakup Krasniqi and Rexhep Selimi concluded in February. The judgment had been scheduled to be delivered in May, but the judicial panel decided to postpone it until July 20, citing the “complexity of the case” as the reason for the decision.

The Specialist Chambers also clarified that the date of July 20 does not necessarily mean that the judgment will be delivered then, while also warning of the possibility of another postponement.

The post Tromp on The Hague ruling: a compromise solution expected, with acquittals and convictions appeared first on Albeu.com.

The introduction to the letter stresses that its purpose is not to prejudge the Specialist Chambers’ decision-making, but to underline that the way this process against the former KLA leaders is conducted will produce not only legal consequences, but will also affect public trust, interethnic relations, and Kosovo’s perception of international justice.

The authors of the letter explain that this is not the first time they have reacted publicly. They recall that they had previously raised concerns about the admission as evidence of documents originating from Serbia’s institutions.

“This is not our first public reaction to the work of the Specialist Chambers. In August 2025, some of us publicly reacted to the admission of documents originating from Serbian state institutions. We argued at the time that such material required a higher level of scrutiny, given its source, historical context, and the role of Serbian state institutions during the 1990s. That concern has not disappeared. It has become part of a broader concern about justice, transparency, and public trust in the process,” the letter says, Gazeta Express writes.

In the document addressed to Trendafilova, seven main concerns about the course of the process are listed. The first point mentions the British report, which identified several problematic issues, as well as the way the Special Court approached that document.

“First, concerns about a fair trial are now documented, not merely alleged. The preliminary review prepared by the Human Rights Committee of the Bar of England and Wales (BHRC), commissioned by the Ombudsperson Institution of Kosovo, raised serious concerns regarding temporary release and prolonged detention, judicial independence and impartiality, the admissibility and reliability of evidence, equality of arms, legality, and institutional accountability. The Specialist Chambers have publicly challenged some of the characterizations in this report. We note that position. But a rebuttal is not enough. These issues go to the heart of whether the proceedings are perceived as fair in practice, and not merely formally valid on paper,” the letter says.

The second concern relates to detention since November 2020. According to the letter, the duration of this measure has created the impression that detention is taking on a punitive character before there has been a judicial ruling.

“Second, prolonged detention has become one of the most damaging issues for public trust. The accused in the Thaçi et al. case were transferred to the KSC detention facilities in The Hague on November 4 and 5, 2020. They have spent more than five and a half years in detention without a first-instance judgment. We understand that detention decisions are made by judges and that risks are periodically assessed. But from the perspective of many people in Kosovo, such a duration, combined with repeated refusals of temporary release, has created the perception that detention is turning into punishment before a judicial ruling,” the letter continues.

The letter goes on to underline that the way evidence coming from Serbian state institutions is treated remains a deep concern.

“We are not arguing that such documents should be automatically excluded solely because of their origin. We understand the distinction between admissibility and evidentiary weight. But documents produced by Serbian state bodies during the 1990s cannot be treated as ordinary administrative documents. Many of those same state structures were involved in repression, forced displacement, war crimes, denial, and organized disinformation against the Kosovo Albanians. For this reason, their origin, chain of custody, verification, and use in final findings require the most rigorous scrutiny possible.”

The fourth concern presented is the issue of collective responsibility and the Specialist Prosecutor’s definition of the former KLA leaders as a joint criminal enterprise.

“The distinction between individual responsibility and collective guilt has not been clearly protected in the eyes of the public. Formally, the case concerns four individuals. Politically and socially, however, many Kosovars see the process as a trial against the Kosovo Liberation Army, against Kosovo’s war for freedom, NATO’s humanitarian intervention, and the state-building process that followed. This does not mean that individual crimes should be ignored. They should not be ignored. But international criminal justice must be careful that individual responsibility does not turn into collective guilt. In Kosovo, many people do not hear this case merely as proceedings against four individuals. They have heard the Prosecution refer to the KLA as a whole as a joint criminal enterprise, portraying Kosovo’s war for freedom and the moral foundation of its statehood as the result of a criminal undertaking. This perception cannot be dismissed simply as emotion or nationalism.”

The letter also mentions earlier proceedings conducted by the Hague Tribunal, UNMIK, EULEX, and local courts, in which former KLA members were defendants. According to the signatories, a narrative that criminalizes the KLA war would weaken justice and increase the feeling that the process is sliding toward collective labeling.

“Our view on this is clear, as it is for the absolute majority of Kosovo’s citizens. We believe that the KLA waged a just and defensive war for Kosovo’s freedom against an oppressive and violent state apparatus led by Slobodan Milošević. We also reaffirm that wherever alleged crimes were committed, whether against civilians, political opponents, or members of minority communities, those crimes deserve justice. But this is not the first time such crimes have been addressed. The ICTY, UNMIK, EULEX, Kosovo’s courts, and now the Specialist Chambers have all dealt with war crimes cases related to Kosovo, including cases involving former KLA members. What is deeply troubling is the shift toward a narrative that risks portraying Kosovo’s war for liberation from Serbian oppression as criminal in nature. This would not strengthen justice. It would deepen the sense among many Kosovars that this process has moved from individual responsibility toward collective labeling.”

Another issue raised is the lack of public trust in the Special Court. The letter assesses that most Kosovo Albanians perceive it as biased, while Kosovo Serbs may see any acquittal as a failure. Likewise, victims from different communities may still feel unrepresented.

“Fifth, the Specialist Chambers have not built the public trust required. Their outreach activities have been too limited, too technical, and too distant from the everyday concerns of Kosovo’s citizens. As a result, many Kosovo Albanians see the Court as biased, many Kosovo Serbs may see any acquittal as a failure, while victims from different communities may still feel unrepresented.”

The signatories of the letter also express concern about the consequences that a Specialist Chambers ruling could have on the political and security fronts.

“A judgment delivered in a society that does not trust the process may deepen polarization, fuel disinformation, and create new space for actors who want to delegitimize Kosovo’s liberation war, its statehood, and its Euro-Atlantic future, as well as incite hostility between communities.”

In the letter, Trendafilova is also reminded of the possibility that Serbia and Russia could use the ruling to call into question the narrative of Kosovo’s liberation and its argument for statehood.

“The process that led to the creation of the Court has a contested political history. That history is documented in academic literature, which argues that strategic narratives, some of them linked to actors hostile to Kosovo’s statehood, influenced the path toward the establishment of the Court. We are not asking the Trial Panel to judge that history. We ask only that it be acknowledged that the ruling will be read in this context and that it will almost certainly be used by Serbia and Russia to delegitimize the narrative of Kosovo’s liberation and its argument for statehood, regardless of the content of the ruling.”

At the end of the list of concerns, the letter also addresses the temporal scope of jurisdiction, which it says raises doubts about selective accountability.

“The Court’s mandate extends until September 1999, after the deployment of KFOR and UNMIK. Holding KLA figures accountable for events that occurred under international administration, while international actors from that period are not subject to similar scrutiny, is perceived by many citizens of Kosovo as selective,” the document says.

After presenting the seven concerns, the authors of the letter also addressed several requests to the president of the Specialist Chambers.

Among them are a request for a substantive response to the issues raised by the British, clarification regarding admitted Serbian evidence, a review of the practice and reasoning behind the extension of detention, as well as enabling independent and long-term monitoring of the judicial process.

“Provide a substantive public response to the concerns raised by the BHRC’s preliminary report and the Ombudsperson Institution of Kosovo.

Apply and publicly explain an enhanced standard of scrutiny for contested evidence originating from Serbian state institutions of the 1990s.

Review the practice and reasoning concerning prolonged detention and temporary release.

Enable independent and long-term monitoring of the judicial process and its legacy.

Encourage diplomatic missions and funding states to support transparency, independent monitoring, and responsible public communication,” the letter says.

In conclusion, the letter stresses that it is not seeking impunity, but rather that every allegation of crimes be addressed through a process perceived as fair and impartial.

“Alleged crimes against civilians and war crimes, wherever they were committed and by whomever they were committed, deserve justice and accountability. But accountability must be carried out through a process that people can recognize as fair and impartial. A process perceived as selective, remote, and politically motivated cannot repair trust, nor can it support reconciliation. Justice and Kosovo’s statehood are not opposing goals. They should reinforce one another. Kosovo accepted the Specialist Chambers because it was told that justice, accountability, and international legitimacy would proceed in parallel. Now the Court and the states that support it have the responsibility to prove that this was not an empty promise,” the letter says.

The post 22 civil society representatives write to The Hague, list seven concerns about the trial of former KLA leaders appeared first on Albeu.com.

According to Lamallari, the meeting discussed an agreement between the two governments aimed at strengthening institutional and operational cooperation between the two countries.

The Albanian minister also presented the results achieved by Albania in the fight against organized crime. He highlighted the establishment of the Asset Recovery Office within the State Police, as well as the management of seized and confiscated assets.

“I reaffirmed the unwavering commitment of the Albanian government and shared with him Albania’s concrete results in the fight against organized crime, including the establishment of the Asset Recovery Office within the State Police and the effective management of seized and confiscated assets by the Agency for the Administration of Seized and Confiscated Assets, while highlighting the potential for cooperation in strengthening financial investigation mechanisms and increasing the capacities of law enforcement institutions,” Minister Lamallari said.

He also underlined that both sides have confirmed their commitment to deepening the exchange of information and expanding operational cooperation between police structures.

Lamallari also expressed gratitude for the Netherlands’ continued support for reform processes in Albania and the country’s path toward membership in the European Union. According to him, progress in the negotiations is evident and the goal of completing the technical phase by 2027 remains achievable.

“We confirmed our shared commitment to deepen the exchange of information and operational police cooperation. Grateful for the Netherlands’ continued support in our reform processes and on our path toward membership in the European Union. Our progress in the negotiations is evident and the ambitious objective of completing the technical phase by 2027 is fully achievable,” Lamallari wrote on social media.

During his stay in The Hague, Minister Lamallari is also expected to hold meetings at Eurojust and Europol.

The post Lamallari from The Hague: Albania and the Netherlands moving toward an agreement on security and law enforcement appeared first on Albeu.com.

In a statement made public on Monday, the institution emphasized that the regulation for such cases was approved by the judges in line with international human rights standards, including Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights and the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners.

According to the statement, “So far, the judges of the Specialist Chambers have authorized 14 such visits to Kosovo for detainees, while their organization and management have been handled by the court itself.”

According to the clarification, these visits are approved in special humanitarian circumstances, such as cases when a relative is seriously ill or when the detainee must attend funeral ceremonies and stay with family following the loss of a relative.

The Specialist Chambers also announced that, in the case of former president Hashim Thaçi, the judges have authorized four such visits to Kosovo on humanitarian grounds.

These clarifications, according to the institution, were provided in relation to the procedures and legal basis that make temporary visits by detainees to Kosovo possible.

The post Specialist Chambers clarify legal basis: detainees may travel to Kosovo for humanitarian reasons appeared first on Albeu.com.