AFormer Kosovo Liberation Army ( U n The CK) at The Hague and would provide additional expertise to defence teams in the complaint phase.
Bajrami has estimated that the upcoming process at the Appeal presents an important judicial and institutional challenge for Kosovo. According to him, engagement at this stage should focus on professional arguments, analysis of evidence and identification of possible procedural and material violations.
The upcoming battle is exclusively judicial, Bajrami wrote, stressing that Kosovo should shift its focus from political mobilization towards judicial and professional engagement.
Under his proposal, the commission should be composed of judges and former judges, prosecutors, criminal lawyers, criminal law professors and international criminal law experts.
This mechanism, according to Bajrami, would have had for mandate to analyse the first degree act, review the way evidence assessment, individual criminal responsibility and judicial basis for command responsibility claims.
He has requested that the commission’s expertise be completed within November, taking into account the procedural terms of complaint. However, it has stressed that the work of this commission should not impede the preparation and handover of complaints by defence teams.
The commission’s document should serve as additional protection material and not as a condition or obstacle to timely handing over complaints, he stressed.
In his proposal, the academic has also listed several areas where the legal strategy should focus on the second degree.
Among them are the objection to the actual agreement of the indictment, the analysis of the individual responsibility of the accused, the assessment of witness credibility, and the review of claims on the existence of a criminal plan or purpose.
Special attention, according to him, should also be given to document the historical and legal context of the war in Kosovo, as well as to analyse the KLA organisational and command structure.
Bajrami has also proposed identifying additional witnesses and evidence that can be accepted in the complaining procedure, underlining that the complaint does not imply automatic repetition of first degree judgment.
The goal is not simply to increase the number of witnesses. The goal is for any evidence and any evidence to have concrete judicial significance, he wrote.
Another academic proposal is the inclusion of international experts and independent organisations in monitoring the respect of fair standards in Specialised Chambers.
In this regard, he has cited the importance of respecting the presumption of innocence, the equality of weapons between prosecution and defence, the right to effective protection and impartial management of evidence.
Bajrami has also demanded that Kosovo review Croatia’s experience in the judicial process of generals Ante Gotovina and Mladen Markac in the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia.
The two generals were sentenced to the first degree, but on 16 November 2012, the Appeals Chamber cleared them of their respective charges and overturned their sentences.
According to Bajrami, this case should be studied about how the actual findings were rejected, how evidence was assessed, and what legal arguments have led to a change in the appeal decision.
In his proposals, Bajrami has included the diplomatic engagement of Kosovo institutions. He has demanded that the president, prime minister and minister of foreign affairs communicate with the donor states of the Specialised Chambers and the friendly states of Kosovo.
Through these contacts, according to him, support should be sought for independent international monitoring, greater institutional transparency and international judicial expertise.
However, he has stressed that such commitment should be carried out without violating the court’s independence and creating political pressure on the judicial process.
In conclusion, the academic has called for immediate institutional action, mobilise local expertise and co-ordination with defence teams.
The KLA war must be protected through historical truth, while the innocence of the accused should be argued through evidence and standards of criminal law, Bajrami has concluded.
Source Layer: Insander