Journalist Baton Haxhiu was interviewed today by two investigators at the "Qendra" police station in Pristina regarding a statement made on Pressing on T7 about a week ago.
Haxhiu wrote in an op-ed that prosecutor Arianit Salihu had authorized his interview, "turning a political analysis into a procedural object."
Today, Haxhiu said he was at the investigator's office, where he was questioned as a witness.
"And what I saw was not just a procedure, but a misunderstanding that has taken institutional form," he writes.
Haxhiu had said on Pressing on T7 that citizens should "get rid of" the incumbent Prime Minister, Albin Kurti, in such a way that they decide to either give him 80 seats in the Assembly, or remove him from government.
"We have lost a lot in this country and we are dealing with procedures. And this is unfortunate. And what I have to say is, citizens should prepare for two things: either let them give the man 80 votes, or let them show that he is not ready to govern, that this no longer makes sense," he said.
"The citizens of Kosovo are playing with themselves. Get rid of them in any way. Either give them 80 votes, or remove them so that others can govern, because we are tired," said Haxhiu.
In the invitation seen by Gazeta Express, the police ask Haxhiu to appear for an interview at the Directorate for the Investigation of Organized Crime and Serious Crimes at the main police station in Pristina to "be questioned regarding the handling of information", with a multi-digit number.
Haxhiu wrote that the two investigators who interviewed him “were correct” and “professional,” but that the prosecutor who authorized his interview had misread his statement.
"And at one point, in a conversation that went beyond formality, they told me that this case was initiated by the prosecutor. And that for them this was a professional obligation. That's when I felt regret. Because this was no longer a matter of an invitation. It was a matter of the way my word was read. And when the word is read incorrectly by a citizen, it is a misunderstanding. When it is read incorrectly by an analyst, it is a debate. But when it is read incorrectly by a prosecutor and it returns to the procedure, then we have a problem, because a prosecutor does not have the luxury of misreading," he wrote.
t7 live
