EULEX would like to recall the following:

On “new” EULEX cases:

Yes of course there are new EULEX-cases, since the laws adopted in April 2014 stipulate that EULEX prosecutors normally work on on-going cases unless in “extraordinary circumstances a case is assigned to an EULEX prosecutor” by a joint decision by the competent bodies, which are the Chief State Prosecutor and  the Chief EULEX Prosecutor.  In accordance with these laws, since April 2014 a total of 46 such requests were filed. Out of these, EULEX prosecutors have been assigned to 38 new cases, of which 31 are cases under the competence of the Basic Prosecution Office of Mitrovica and 7 are cases under the competence of SPRK. 7 requests were rejected, 1 request was withdrawn. 8 cases were assigned to a mixed team of a EULEX and Local Prosecutors.

On EULEX executive powers in the North of Kosovo: 

We recall that EULEX still retains such competencies (pursuant to Article 7 paragraphs 1 and 5 as well as Article 7A -as described above- of the Law on Jurisdiction). Anyone who says otherwise has their facts wrong, not grounded on the current legal basis and therefore false. 

And - related to the EULEX involvement in the North of Kosovo - on the alleged shooting leading to the death of a young man in the village of Suhodoll near Mitrovica:

Out of respect for the families of victims and in line with the prosecutorial practice in Kosovo, autopsy reports are not released to the public. The autopsy report in this case is no exception to this rule. However, the competent EULEX Prosecutor has authorized the following information to the public:

“There was no shooting involved. The victim did not have any traces of bullet wounds. During the crime site reconstruction, the one (and only) person hinting at a shooting previously did not recall such an incident.”

In regards to point eight of the motion, we would like to reiterate that the mentioned report is a fabrication.

Here is what the EU Special Representative spokesperson Stojan Pelko stated on 12 June 2015: 

"We have no knowledge of such a report and therefore cannot speculate who and with what motives drafted it. 

We can however clearly confirm that the report was not prepared by EULEX, EEAS or European Commission neither for any of these organisations."