The Special Court has reacted after receiving a letter from the Ombudsman, Naim Qelaj, regarding the receipt of documents originating from Serbian authorities in cases against former KLA leaders.
In its response, the Special Court emphasizes that the decision to admit evidence does not automatically imply the weight or credibility that will be given to it during the final decision-making, reports Insajderi.
According to the Court, when drafting the verdict, the Trial Panel evaluates each piece of evidence individually, examining it in the context of the entirety of the evidence administered during the trial.
"When considering whether the factual allegations have been proven, the trial panel makes a comprehensive assessment and weighing, taking into account the evidence as a whole. The Rules do not allow a guilty verdict to be based solely on the evidence of a witness that the Defense has not had the opportunity to question," the response states.
The Special Court also emphasizes that the admission of evidence does not necessarily mean that it will be used as the basis for the final verdict.
"At the end of the trial, the judges evaluate each piece of evidence in the context of the admitted evidence and determine the weight and credibility to be given to it," it further states.
This reaction comes after the Ombudsman expressed serious concerns regarding the admission of official documents that, according to him, allegedly originate from Serbian authorities, which exercised jurisdiction over the territory of Kosovo after June 1999.
In his letter, Qelaj emphasized that this period coincides with the establishment of the interim international administration authorized by the UN Security Council, during which the functioning of Serbian judicial institutions in Kosovo was illegal under international law.
"Consequently, the admission of these documents raises serious concerns about both their legality, including under public international law, and their evidentiary reliability," the Ombudsman's letter states.
