Besides closed or private hearings, another measure to protect witnesses is voice modification. All the interviewed journalists mentioned instances where excessive voice modification made the witnesses’ statements unintelligible.

Kika says that there have been cases when, due to uncertainty, he had to make the decision not to report at all on certain sessions.

“One of the most difficult cases I’ve had was precisely in the case of Pjetër Shala, when the [witness’s] voice was so deformed that it created great opportunities for me to be wrong. I called a colleague to listen together and all we could conclude was that we couldn’t hear it well and it is better not to report it at all,” said Kika. “You don’t know if it’s more important for the public what you didn’t understand from the testimony with a distorted voice than what you end up reporting.”

In 2022, the Kosovo Institute for Justice (IKD) published a report on the work of the Special Court. In addition to excessive voice modification, the report notes another problem. Witnesses are often asked closed questions, in which a “yes or no” answer is required, and their answer is not heard.

Doyle of the Special Court told K2.0 that “the Judges continuously remind the parties to wait five seconds after a question is posed in order to respond, so that both a translated question and its response can be clearly heard.” He added that transcripts of public proceedings are posted several days after each hearing, so that if any part of the public testimony is not heard, it can be read later in the public transcript.

But for daily news journalists, this comes too late.

The hearings are broadcast with a 45-minute delay on the Special Court’s website. This is in case they need to be redacted, for example if a witness provides confidential information that would compromise his identity or that of other persons involved in the case. Meanwhile, the hundreds of accompanying documents published on the Special Court’s website are often redacted prior to publication to hide sensitive information.

There have been cases when the Special Court has decided that information is confidential after the publication of documents and asked the media to remove the information from their articles. This practice has also been criticized in previous years.

The IKD report also mentioned cases during 2021 when the media were asked to remove the information that had already been made public: “On October 4, the court issued an order after the session, from the public broadcast of the session, the public transcript, the audio visual recording to remove a part, which they considered to contain confidential information. Among other things, the persons, media, organizations, who have the entire transcript or even the part containing this confidential information were ordered not to disclose it to other persons or other organizations. Otherwise, according to the order, criminal proceedings would be initiated.”

This practice has continued and journalists in The Hague have mentioned similar recent instances.

Concerns about transparency

Clarity in reporting is crucial when it comes to court proceedings taking place at the Special Court.

According to Besnik Gashi, a journalist at Insajderi news portal, reporting on the court requires more precision than on other topics from the judicial system in Kosovo. This is due to the ambiguities of the document materials and because of the considerable gap created by the editing of the materials.

“Let’s say, the almost main source of information for reporting is the submissions and complaints of the defense, the prosecution, as well as the decisions taken by the first and second instance of the court. Usually, they are published as redacted and the unredacted version can be published a month later, which creates a delay in the document and confuses journalists whether to report on that issue or not,” said Gashi.

Journalists also note that they do not have the opportunity to receive additional information from the Specialized Prosecutor’s Office (SPO).

“They don’t offer any clarification on almost any question. Normally, the Prosecutor’s Office has its duty to carry out investigations and does not offer them to the public, but in some topics, it is impossible to carry out the news articles because there is no answer from the Prosecutor’s Office,” said Beha. “‘We do not comment on this topic’ is the answer we usually get from this institution. In eight years of existence, the Specialist Prosecutor has given only one interview to the Kosovo media.”

In a statement the SPO told K2.0 that it seeks to be transparent within the limits — legal, professional and ethical — that apply to prosecutors. The SPO also noted that the creation of the Special Court and its location in The Hague was a result of the climate of intimidation in Kosovo towards witnesses.

Journalists also criticized the SPO for their rare appearances in the media. The SPO told K2.0 that prosecutors speak best in court and that the organization “looks always to find ways to increase the amount of proceedings that are made public, while also providing the necessary safeguards for witnesses”.

Reporting on the Special Court from a distance

Kosovar journalists face difficulties reporting on the trial in The Hague.

Who is being tried in The Hague?

Gentiana Paçarizi

Reporting on the Special Court from a distance

Kosovar journalists face difficulties reporting on the trial in The Hague.

Who is being tried in The Hague?

Gentiana Paçarizi