![](/sites/default/files/public/content/20230921-pb.jpg)
the archive of all previous press briefings is available on this page and the video files can be found on our youtube channel
Today’s hearing in the Shala case will sit longer than previously announced – it is now expected to last until 16:00 (or until 16:45 in the delayed feed online).
Here is the transcript of today's KSC Weekly Press Briefing.
the archive of all previous press briefings is available on this page and the video files can be found on our youtube channel
After the current break (until 13:10 in the live feed or 13:55 in the delayed feed), the trial against Shala should resume with another full session (1,5 hour). Then, another 15-minute break will take place, after which the trial is expected to resume until 15:30 (16:15 in the delayed feed).
Witness Bardhyl Mahmuti resumed his testimony this morning. He is now being cross-examined by the SPO.
Another KSC weekly press briefing will take place on Thursday, 21 September, at 14:30. During this briefing, the KSC Spokespersons will provide a short update on the latest developments in the judicial proceedings before the KSC, as well as on other public activities of the Court. Journalists will have the opportunity to ask questions. Pre-registration is required to attend each briefing. To pre-register, please send an email with name and affiliation to [email protected]. Deadline for pre-registration is every Thursday at 12:00. The Zoom details will be shared following pre-registration. Recordings of the update provided during the Weekly Press Briefings will be made available on the KSC YouTube Channel.
Please be informed that the hearing in the Shala case tomorrow, 21 September, will commence at 09:00 and not at 09:30 as previously scheduled.
Our Calendar has the latest information on the courtroom schedule.
After the lunch break, the Shala trial will resume at 14:00 (or at 14:45 in the delayed feed) and not at 14:30 as usual.
In the trial of Pjetër Shala, the Defence has begun its presentation of evidence by calling the first witness this morning. This is Bardhyl Mahmuti and he is testifying without protective measures.
At the beginning of today’s hearing, Trial Panel I announced that the Defence was ordered to shorten the length of direct examination for some of its witnesses. This was done in order to ensure that the questioning of witnesses is conducted efficiently and that it is focused on eliciting evidence relevant to the case, the Panel explained, and accordingly revised the overall time allocated to the Defence to present its case from 40,5 to 31,5 hours.
On 19 September, Trial Panel II denied the latest report with nine applications for the status of participating victims in the Thaҫi et al. case. The Panel declined to consider the merits of the applications as the time limit to file such applications in this case expired on 15 February and no good cause had been shown to recognize them as valid as provided in Rule 9 (5)(b). However, the Panel noted that the Victims’ Participation Office may resubmit the report with certain additional information. The full decision can be found here.
On 18 September 2023, the Supreme Court Panel, consisting of Judges Ekaterina Trendafilova (Presiding), Christine van den Wyngaert and Daniel Fransen, rejected both Gucati’s and Haradinaj’s requests for protection of legality, filed pursuant to Article 48(6), (7) and (8) of the Law.
In its decision, the Panel first rejected the request for an oral hearing as it was found without merit. Furthermore, Gucati’s request that another accused (Dritan Goxhaj) intervenes in the proceedings was also rejected as the Panel found that Gucati has no standing for such a request adding that “it is not for Gucati to seek to protect the perceived interests of another accused as part of his own request.”
In relation to the actual grounds of the requests (7 by each requestor), the Panel dismissed them by either finding there has been no violation of the criminal law, no substantial violation of the procedures by the Trial Panel and the Court of Appeals Panel or by finding them inadmissible. Here is the decision.
More details about the Gucati&Haradinaj case is available on the dedicated case page.