Time for eULeX To prioriTize war crimes - Amnesty International ...

Kosovo: Time for EULEX to prioritize war crimes 43
near Prizren. According to the OSCE, unknown individuals subsequently disinterred the body of the former
witness and set it alight, and distributed leaflets claiming responsibility for the murder, stating that they
“[would] not cease executing all collaborators”. A local newspaper then included the surviving witness’ name
in its report on the incident. OSCE reported that according to investigators in the case, “The reluctance of the
local population to co-operate (fear of revenge and admiration of the two main suspects) is a primary problem
in the case. Even if willing to testify or co-operate, the public does not have confidence that the authorities
could effectively protect them from revenge by the suspects”. 124
Fear is not the only factor which motivates potential witnesses in their refusal to testify.
Loyalty to the KLA is another strong factor. For example, many Kosovo Albanians considered
the Mayor of Suva Reka/Suhareke, a former member of the KLA, to be a hero for his refusal
to testify in a pre-trial hearing in the Klečka/Kleçkë (Limaj) case. He was subsequently
imprisonment for two months for contempt of court. 125
EULEX WITNESS PROTECTION PROGRAMME
“EULEX has its own Witness Security Programme which is in operation in Kosovo and
beyond. It is staffed by officers who have considerable experience in this highly sensitive and
important area. I cannot go into names or details or numbers, because that is the whole point
of it -- it must remain secret for the safety and security of those individuals and their families
who pass through the programme. But I can tell you that the programme has been repeatedly
tested and many people have used, and are using it. EULEX develop[ed] this Programme in
order to help Kosovo deal with some of its most difficult and challenging court cases. …”,
Head of EULEX mission, Xavier de Marnac, following allegations related to Agim Zogaj (see
below). 126
Concerns about EULEX’s Witness Security Unit/Protection Programme , its professionalism,
capacity and effectiveness have been repeatedly raised, including by EULEX officials,
(although none have been prepared to go on record), and some permanent representatives of
EU member states interviewed by Amnesty International in January 2012 in Brussels.
In January 2011, in a report to the PACE, Rapportuer Jean-Charles Gardetto expressed
concern at the “chronic lack of staff” in the EULEX Programme, which meant that, “a
number of cases cannot be currently investigated because the EULEX WPU [Witness
Protection Unit] would not have the means to protect the witnesses. The Rapporteur believes
that this is a serious obstacle in the administration of justice that could be remedied by
allocating more manpower to the WPU”. 127 An internal briefing dated June/July 2011, seen
by Amnesty International, notes that, in connection with investigations into the Marty report
(above) “the main challenge remains to enhance the witness protection unit inside EULEX
which called for the strengthening of EULEX’s provisions for witness protection” and to find
locations outside Kosovo where witnesses could be effectively protected.
Another reason for the failure of witness protection programmes is the financial cost. An
example is the trial of Sabit Geçi and Riza Alija, charged with the torture and abuse of
Albanian civilian detainees in Kukës in Albania, which opened in March 2011. Some 20
witnesses who testified in proceedings were placed in the witness protection programme. 128
For obvious reasons, Amnesty International is not party to the measures applied to these
witnesses, however, based on interviews with members of the UNMIK Witness Protection
Unit, many witnesses were relocated to a safe house or houses within Kosovo, often with all
Index: EUR 70/004/2012 Amnesty International April 2012