Balkan Fellowship for Journalistic Excellence Shortlisted for European Press Prize

Balkan Fellowship for Journalistic Excellence programme and its editor Neil Arun have been nominated for the European Press Prize 2012 in the Innovation Award category for the outstanding innovation of the year.

In order to encourage regional networking among journalists and advance balanced coverage on topics that are central to the region as well as to the European Union, the Robert Bosch Stiftung and the ERSTE Foundation, in cooperation with the Balkan Investigative Reporting Network, BIRN, have initiated the Balkan Fellowship for Journalistic Excellence programme in 2007.

Each year, ten Balkan journalists are competitively chosen to receive funding and professional support to conduct their own research project.

Adrian Mogos, a Romanian journalist and Fellowship alumni, has been also nominated in the News Reporting  Award category, for the reporter or specialist expert whose work has made a decisive impact.

Awards will be also made in two further categories – the Editing Award and the Commentator Award.

The idea for the awards was born in 2011 when representatives of seven European media foundations joined forces to launch the European Press Prize in order to reward excellence in journalism across all 47 European countries. They agreed that launching the awards would encourage high-quality, innovative and independent journalism.

Each award carries a prize of 10,000 euros, to be spent wherever possible on a personal project that may in turn enrich the practice of journalism.

The winners will be announced later this month by the jury which is chaired by veteran British journalist and editor Sir Harold Evans, and the awards will be presented on February 26 at the De Balie Debating Centre in Amsterdam.

BIRN Meeting Brings Balkan Journalistic Teams Together

As a result of a new two-year grant from the United Kingdom’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office, BIRN is bringing together its team of journalists from across the Balkans for a two-day training.

At the meeting in Belgrade from January 12-13, the Balkan Transitional Justice team will also develop a series of major cross-regional investigations, discuss project activities for the forthcoming two years and development session aimed at enhancing investigative reporting skills and techniques for covering transitional justice issues.

Those attending will include BIRN’s reporters, translators, television editor and radio producer, and the session will also introduce to the entire team the new English-language editor-in-chief for Balkan Transitional Justice, Matthew Collin.

The Balkan Insight team of correspondents and editors will also be present at the meeting for joint cross-regional editorial discussions.

“This is an important opportunity to get all our journalists together, face to face, and work on strategies and collaborative projects for the future,” said Collin.

“The exchange of ideas should be fascinating and form the basis for some important investigative work,” he said.

The United Kingdom’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office is now the third donor for the Balkan Transitional Justice project, alongside the European Commission and the Federal Department of Foreign Affairs of Switzerland.

Discussion: How a person skipped a trial on murder charges

Justice in Kosovo broadcast a programme about how someone accused of attempted murder was released by the police without charge.

Questions covered included: What happened to farmer Rifat Thaçi on the day he decided to go out for a picnic with his family? Why did the defendant, 72-year-old Ramë Rama, allegedly try to kill Mr. Thaçi? How it is possible that even after such a serious crime, the prosecution released Mr. Rama from detention?

What is the opinion of the parties involved in this process? When the prosecution failed, was the imam of the village successful in resolving the conflict? Finally, what did the chief district prosecutor for Mitrovica say about this decision?

To discuss these and related issues, researcher Petrit Kryeziu interviewed:

  • Rifat Thaçi,
  • Hajrie Thaçi,
  • Izet Hajrizi and
  • Avdyl Ramaj – the injured parties;

  • Fadil Idrizi – the village imam;

  • Shyqyri Syla – chief prosecutor from the District Prosecution in Mitrovica; and

  • Kadri Begolli – acting director of the Office of the Disciplinary Council.

The report started with Mr. Thaçi, who spoke about what happened during a picnic with his family, which turned into a crime scene: when they arrived at the planned place for picnic, they encountered a barrier fence. Mr. Thaçi broke the fence in order to walk across land belonging to his friend, where trouble broke out.

Contrary to Mr. Thaçi, Mr. Rama claims that the fence that was broken was in his land. A fight broke out, which ended when Mr. Rama fired two bullets, injuring Thaçi in the leg and head.

This case was passed on to the judicial bodies in Mitrovica. The suspect was put in detention. The district prosecutor proposed extending detention for two months, but after ten days the same prosecutor asked to substitute house arrest for detention, on the grounds that the parties had settled the dispute between themselves.

Regarding this, Mr. Thaçi said “I don’t know how the prosecutor concluded that we have agreed with Rama. Who said to her that we have agreed? Due to Rama’s release, my family feels victimised again. In order to avoid fights and troubles, we have moved here, to Prishtina!”

Similarly, Mr. Hajrizi said “I don’t know what kind of prosecutor this is, who releases a person who has committed such a crime, and at the same time points out that the families have agreed – which did not happen at all.”

“I have tried to help these two families reach reconciliation. However, after a month, I did not contend with it any longer,” said Mr. Idrizi, a village imam.

Mr. Syla said “there was a technical mistake made by the prosecutor, who asked to substitute the [detention] measure, because the sentence that highlighted the fact that the families had agreed was left in the computer from previous proposals.”

He went on to say that “this mistake is nothing compared to the [other] mistakes that happen due to the working conditions within the prosecutor[’s offices].”

Video: http://www.jetanekosove.com/drejtesia/959/Alb

Discussion: Domestic violence

Justice in Kosovo returned to a previous domestic violence case, and considered the continued failure of judicial institutions to deal with such cases.

Among the questions covered in the debate were:

How did the Kosovo Police react when a victim complained that a gynaecologist performed an abortion at the request of her mother-in-law? How did the gynaecologist, Ramadan Maliqi, respond to the victim’s allegations? Why does the victim complain that police officers have advised her to endure violence?

Why does Ismet Hashani, the Kosovo Police spokesman for the region of Gjilan, hesitate to mention the names of Arbnora Leka and Shaban Hajdari, the police officers who dealt with the victim’s case?

Why did the judge, Emine Salihu, deal with a large number of court cases, including some received later, but kept this case pending? Why has the Centre for Social Work hidden the court case from the victim?

Is it true that Reshat Zeqiri, a social worker, supported the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the victim by allowing them to get custody of a child without the consent of mother?

In order to discuss these issues, journalist Leonora Aliu interviewed the victim of domestic violence, a number of witnesses and the following officials:

  • Ismet Hashani, Kosovo Police spokesman for the region of Gjilan;
  • Fahri Nuhiu, prosecutor in the District Prosecution in Gjilan;
  • Kolë Ramaj, a lawyer; and
  • Mehat Berisha, head of social services at the Centre for Social Work in Gjilan.

M. B. was in the third month of pregnancy, but was also very young when her mother-in-law ordered her to abort the pregnancy, allegedly because M. B. was taking medical drugs, and the child was not expected to be born ‘normal’.

“My mother-in-law and father-in-law did not love me, they would have preferred a bride with Swiss documents, who works there and sends them money. I didn’t even have money for myself,” M. B. told Justice in Kosovo. “I have often asked them why they behaved that way and why they beat me constantly. Their answer was that ‘we don’t want you, and that’s all!’”
One day, the victim’s mother-in-law took her to a gynaecology clinic.

“When we went inside the clinic, the nurse said that she would just examine me, but then she began to kill my baby with her tools,” she explained.

She said that she had started to cry; she didn’t trust the doctor, who was telling her that the child was already dead and must be removed from her womb.

Regardless, she returned to her husband because, as she said, “I was young and I was afraid to tell the truth. Therefore, I returned with the hope that everything was going to be alright.”

The beatings continued even after the victim became pregnant for a second time. “Even after my daughter was born, their violence did not stop,” said M.B.

Due to the continued violence, the victim was forced to go out into the street. “One day, they beat me too much, so I decided to escape from the house. I ran as much as I could, until I met a police patrol in the street. They brought me to the nearest police station and took my statement,” she said.

Arbnora Leka and Shaban Hajdari were the two officers from the police department for domestic violence, who received the victim’s statement on the day her father-in-law had pulled her hair out by the roots. However, the victim’s statement was not enough for them, because, according to her, “they said that I must accept my mother-in-law’s behaviour, because she is older.”

Related to this case, Mr. Hashani denied the accusations against the two police officers: “I cannot believe that this is true. I am very sure that the police did their job properly.”

Meanwhile, when asked about the investigation into the violent abortion carried out by Dr Ramadan Maliqi, Mr. Hashani said that “the doctor told us that he does not register his patients and their cases”.

Mr. Nuhiu said that “on May 24, 2005, a criminal case against Metush Hajdari, the father-in-law of M.B., was raised on charges of causing bodily injury to her. Today, I understood that this case remained unresolved and pending, and that the competent judge has taken a decision to refuse the charges.”

Mr. Ramaj said that “this is a drastic violation of human rights and an abuse of official position by the judge. If the competent judge has resolved new cases and left this one pending, then there is room for doubt that she intentionally didn’t resolve it.”

Moreover, Mr. Berisha admitted that the Centre for Social Work in Gjilan received a request from M.B. to take custody of her child.

Video: http://www.jetanekosove.com/lexo/840/Eng

Discussion: The resignation of the KPI’s director of investigations

Justice in Kosovo broadcast a programme about the resignation of Valdet Hoxha, the former director of investigations at the Kosovo Police Inspectorate.

Among the questions discussed were: Why did Mr. Hoxha resign? What did police chief Fitim Shishani say to Mr. Hoxha about the possibility of a change in his job? What was Mr. Hoxha’s reaction? How did Jetullah Aliu take up the position? What is the relationship between Mr. Shishani and Mr. Aliu? What did Mr. Aliu do before? Was there any political interference in this transfer?

To discuss these and related issues, researcher Petrit Kryeziu interviewed:

  • Fitim Shishani, head of the KPI;
  • Valdet Hoxha, former head of investigations at KPI; and
  • Jetullah Aliu, the current head of investigations at KPI.

The interview started with Mr. Hoxha, who said that he believes his change of position was a form of political revenge, for being a member of the General Council of the Democratic League of Kosovo (LDK) until 2006. He also said, “I have asked Mr. Shishani why I had to leave my position as investigations director. The answer I received was final: the person who shall fill this position is Jetullah Aliu.”

On the other hand, Mr. Shishani said “I have offered Mr. Hoxha a position that was at the same level as his previous one.”

However, he went on to say that the new position is not yet functional, and that “when Valdet Hoxha left the inspectorate, I was in an undesirable situation because I had not found the right person to perform as well as Mr. Hoxha had”.

“I appreciate the work Mr. Hoxha has done, but I think that I will give a greater contribution,” Mr. Aliu said. He then said “my history basically deals with the police. I consider that my knowledge in the investigative field is sufficient.”

He also claimed that he had received positive comments for his commitment in the police inspectorate.
 
Video: http://www.jetanekosove.com/drejtesia/943/Alb

Discussion: The privatisation of NBI Suhareka winery

Justice in Kosovo broadcast a programme about the privatisation process of the NBI Suhareka wine enterprise, including high-profile suspicions about secret deals between businessmen.

Questions covered included:

How much did Suhareka’s mayor, Blerim Kuci, pay for his shares in the enterprise? Why have workers there been striking for three months? Is Mr. Kuci responsible for the destruction of the winery in central Suhareka? Who bought its assets cheap, and why did the Kosovo Privatisation Agency turn a blind eye to the winery’s ‘destruction’? Who has cut down hundreds of hectares of vines in Suhareka, and who plans to build there? Why have Italian businessmen asked for help from the Italian ambassador to Prishtina, and why did conflicts arise between Albanian stakeholders?

To discuss about these and related issues, journalist Kastriot Jahaj interviewed:

  • Blerim Kuçi – mayor of Suhareka municipality;
  • Roberto Migotto – owner of QMI
  • Fazli Morina – former director of production at NBI Suhareka;
  • Malush Sopa – head of the NBI Suhareka workers’ union; and
  • Habib Usaj – former managing director of the enterprise, after privatisation.

NBI Suhareka, which once produced tons of wine and other grape products, has faced constant problems since it was privatised.

Opening the report, Mr. Sopa said “in principle, we all agreed that the enterprise would be privatised. We thought that privatisation would mean that production would increase, but the opposite happened.”

He also said that the privatisation procedures were a problem and that politicians were not interested in improving the enterprise’s performance.

On the other hand, Mr. Kuçi confirmed that there had been an agreement that, following the privatisation of NBI Suhareka, the grape cellar would be destroyed. “This was necessary because the cellar’s location was completely inappropriate,” he claimed.

This particular agreement was formulated in such a way that it ensured the destroyed cellar would belong to Mr. Kuci.

On this point, Mr Kuci said “I am not a shareholder, but we agreed with the company that won the tender that post-privatisation I could acquire certain rights…This agreement was not hidden therefore, and all relevant organs [of the state] were aware of this”.

Mr. Migotto said that the money needed to bid for NBI Suhareka was borrowed. According to him, this does not make Mr. Kuçi a shareholder. “I have taken money from banks and family members.

The Mayor of Suhareka funded this activity to the tune of 450,000 euro… with the one condition that, after privatisation, the property should belong to him. Later, he concluded that in financial accounting, this activity should be listed as a debt.”

Meanwhile, Mr. Morina said that the mayor’s only interest concerns this cellar, which he wants destroyed in order to construct high buildings.

“All of us have been forcibly fired… After a while, they started employing around 40 workers. We have complained to the Kosovo Privatization Agency and the Kosovo Trust Agency, and we have said that the enterprise is being destroyed [and] robbed, and we have submitted all the necessary evidence for this,” Mr. Morina concluded.

According to Mr. Usaj, Blerim Kuci has not had any influence over, or role in, the privatisation process for NBI Suhareka.
 
He also said that he was not aware of the agreement between Mr. Kuci and QMI until February 2008.

Video: http://www.jetanekosove.com/drejtesia/956/Alb

Discussion: Privatisation of a Pipe Factory in Ferizaj

Justice in Kosovo broadcast a programme about the privatisation of a pipe factory in Ferizaj.

Questions covered included: Who privatised this factory, and has there been a background check about the money of buyer Arian Hasani?

How did Arian Hasani buy this factory, and who is backing him financially? Why did Arian Hasani sell the factory to Mabetex – a firm owned by Selim Pacolli, the brother of Deputy Prime Minister Behgjet Pacolli – for only 3 million euro, despite the fact that it is worth 17 million?



Did the Kosovo Trust Agency have the right to privatise the factory? Why haven’t the Kosovo Trust Agency (KTA) and the government paid the 30 million euro debt yet, even though the Constitutional Court of Kosovo has obliged them to do so?

To discuss these and related issues, journalist Kastriot Jahaj interviewed a range of people, including:

  • Sefedin Abazi, a former employee at the factory who is now a beggar;
  • Yzeir Qorrolli, the Chairman of the Union of Factory Workers;
  • Drita Osmani, a former employee;
  • Adem Metushi, a former director of the pipe factory;
  • Haki Shatri, a former member of the KTA board;
Fahmi Baftiu, an attorney;
  • Rasim Maloku, a judge in the municipal court of Ferizaj;
  • Ylli Kaloshi, spokesperson for the KTA.

The interviews began with the story of Mr. Abazi, who spoke about his experience in the pipe factory. “Until the 90s, I worked in this factory as a labourer. The work I did was very well paid.”

He went on to say that he left Kosovo in the 1990s because of the situation in the country. “I went to Germany as a refugee but, after some time, I came back because I heard that life in Kosovo had greatly improved. Like others, I understood that the factory was open, people worked there and they were well paid…But if I had known the reality, I would never have come back,” he told Kastriot Jahaj.

Mrs. Osmani said “the factory where I worked was privatised for a ridiculous price. This kind of factory, with 30 square metres of land and very expensive machinery is not supposed to be privatised at such a low price”.

Mr. Baftiu said that “apart from the production lines, this factory has many departments and also 30 hectares in the urban area of the city. This area is incredibly valuable, with the price for one acre being up to 13,000 euro”.

He went on to say that Mustafe Bucaliu purchased the factory for his nephew Arian Hasani. “Mr. Hasani has worked as a sales manager at ‘Gama Electronics’ – the company of his uncle, Mustafe Bucaliu, and than he became a bidder for the factory,” he concluded.

On the other hand, Mr. Kaloshi said that the KTA had verified the buyer’s history: “At that time, the verification was done by UNMIK bodies. We don’t know the origin of the funds, but the agency has completed the verification of the buyer’s background.”

Mr. Qorrolli said that there were many people interested in buying the pipe factory but, when the time for the competition arrived, all of them withdrew.

“I don’t know the origin of Arian Hasani’s funds…Disclosure of the property’s origin was a prerequisite, but as far as I know, such a thing was never done,” Mr. Metushi claimed.

Mr. Shatri said that “there were cases when Bujar Dugolli asked that Ahmet Shala not be involved in meetings because the information being used was gathered from people with close links to the PDK.”

Mr. Maloku said that the municipal court is powerless to enforce the payment of workers’ compensation. Among others, he said that the responsibility for the execution of this verdict lies within the KPA (Kosovo Privatization Agency).

Video: http://www.jetanekosove.com/drejtesia/934/Alb

Interview with Nazim Bllaca, former member of SHIK

Justice in Kosovo broadcast an exclusive interview with Nazim Bllaca, a former member of the Kosovo Information Service, SHIK.

Two years after his first public appearance, at which he testified about murders and other post-war crimes, Mr. Bllaca confessed to journalist Kastriot Jahaj about crimes committed during the 1999 war in Kosovo.
 
What is the ‘dark side’ of the war that Mr. Bllaca claims has never been discussed before? How many people did he arrest in 1998, and what happened to those people?

Is Mr. Bllaca a witness in the investigation into organ trafficking in the ‘Yellow House’ case? Why is Mr. Bllaca a witness for the ‘Limaj’ case covering war crimes that allegedly occurred in Klecka prison? How does Bllaca feel two years after his first public appearance? How did he feel after fellow former SHIK agent Fahredin Gashi, known as Faruk, was sentenced? Is he satisfied with his 18-year imprisonment conviction? What will Mr. Bllaca’s sentence be for cooperating in the murder of Salih Gashi? What is Mr. Bllaca’s evidence that Azem Syla was the leader of SHIK?

The interview began with Mr. Bllaca telling his story, saying that since he went public with his claims two years ago, he has heard a lot of gossip claiming that he is “a crazy man”, “a betrayer”, “a collaborationist” and so on.

“After the court decision, people understood that I am not mentally ill, I am not illiterate and I can remember hundreds of dates,” he said.

Speaking about his role in the war, Mr. Bllaca revealed that he participated in many arrests. He declared that he handed in at least three people in Blinaje, a zone for which the commander was Shukri Buja, currently mayor of Lipjan.

Mr. Bllaca admitted that he took part in several executions, but that the court “has amnestied” him. He reported that they said: “the murders that Mr. Bllaca has presented have been undisclosed and not researched for 10 years…they have been forgotten and Mr. Bllaca [talking in third person] has succeeded in dusting off this old forgotten information and brought it into view again.”

He remembers very well, ten years ago, while working the land with a combine harvester, that he was “ordered” to go to Prishtina to commit a murder. Asked how he feels when he remembers the murders, Mr. Bllaca replied “it’s a feeling of grief; it is not easy to kill a man.”

Further, he said that anyone who has been against the PDK has been collaborationist. “After every murder, we were celebrating and drinking all night long,” he said.

Mr. Bllaca confirmed that he is a witness in the Klecka case, in which Fatmir Limaj is one of the accused. “The Klecka prison was not established by Fatmir Limaj. How is it possible that, in one prison with 100 prisoners, only one person knows this. Klecka prison was established after a meeting, with headquarters and with minutes…KLA had its head, and the head was Azem Syla,” he said.

Also, he claimed that the leader of the Kosovo Assembly, Jakup Krasniqi, has accused him of being a witness in the ‘Yellow House’ case, but Mr. Bllaca said that he doesn’t even know where the town of Burrel is. Among others, he denies that these charges were intended to damage PDK’s image. “I don’t want to harm anyone, I just want to withdraw the incorrect contribution I have made previously,” he concluded.

Video: http://www.jetanekosove.com/drejtesia/947/Alb

Interview with Minister of Justice Hajredin Kuçi

Justice in Kosovo broadcast an interview with Deputy Prime Minister Hajredin Kuçi, one year after he took up office in the Ministry of Justice.

Questions covered included: Why has the promise to reduce the number of cases in courts been left unfulfilled, and who does Mr. Kuçi think is responsible?

Why did a police raid fail at Dubrava Prison? Who sent information to those in charge of the prison about the intervention? How is it possible that the minister is not informed of embezzlement related to tendering procedures, business trips and vehicles in his ministry? Who will the Minister hold responsible for violations in the ministry?

Why has the minister decided to take more control over the work of prison directors from January 2012?





Asked about the task of reducing the large number of cases in Kosovo’s judiciary, Mr. Kuçi said “this issue is not within my competence directly. What does depend on me is increasing the efficiency of work in the judiciary.”



Further, he said that “as a ministry, we have increased the budget for 130 judges and 45 prosecutors.

Their salaries are acceptable now, and they have no reason to complain. The increased salaries help them to be motivated and reduce the large number of court cases.” 

He went on: “we have established the notary, mediation and arbitration system… This will relieve the courts from cases that can now be examined through these three systems,” he concluded.



Meanwhile, regarding the police’s failure during a raid at Dubrava Prison, Mr. Kuçi said “in advance, I received information from EULEX.

The information alleged that some police officials had notified prisoners that they would be raided. Therefore, the raids have proven to unsuccessful…Knives, other weapons and narcotics, things of which the prisoners were suspected, were not found.”



When asked about money embezzled through tendering procedures, he said “I have no idea about this misuse [of funds]; however, I do not exclude the possibility that such a thing has happened.”



Regarding tenders from the Ministry of Justice, Mr. Kuçi stated that “the same companies, for ten years in a row now, are still winning the tenders. This happens because, over this period, the staff in Public Procurement has not changed”.





In this interview, Mr. Kuçi has promised that, in 2012, the reforms throughout the justice system will be deepened; the Ministry led by him will be more transparent in tendering processes; and, among other things, measures will be undertaken to prevent abuse, as well as create the conditions within the justice system to reduce the number of cases.



Video: http://www.jetanekosove.com/drejtesia/962/Alb

Kosovo – Serbia: Can history be written without insulting others?

TV debate series “Tema” brings in its second episode a debate between historians, two from Kosovo, and two from Serbia on the topic: “Is it possible to write history without insulting others?”

Jusuf Buxhovi and Enver Rexhaj from Kosovo and Cedomir Antic and Momcilo Pavlovic from Serbia often agreed that they disagree during this debate, but they all underlined the necessity of mutual cooperation between historians from Kosovo and Serbia. 

Two key points, which the historians agreed upon during the debate, were that “History never changes, but the perception of history often does” and that “history has been very often misused for achieving political objectives”. 

Historians participating in this TV debate, which was organized by Internews Kosova and BIRN also agreed that history schoolbooks in Serbia and Kosovo must be free of hate speech and should not hesitate to speak the truth. 

Despite profound differences and even mutual accusations, the panellists offered to one-another to exchange information and documentation needed for their future scientific researches.

The debate will premiere on January 7, at 10.30 pm at RTV21 (available on SAT).