"You've made a fool of yourself, you're a hypocrite", a fight broke out at the KLP meeting

The submission for approval to the High Council of Prosecution, KLP of the draft ethical and professional evaluation reports for four prosecutors, was accompanied by debates and disputes in the plenary session on Tuesday, October 8, mainly related to the lack of reasoning in the magistrates' assessment.

The loud discussions and debates among the KLP members made the hall hum like the premises of a noisy bazaar, almost for half the time of the plenary meeting which lasted for about five and a half hours.

The members who raised concerns about the scoring method carried out in these draft reports, emphasized the fact that the ethical-professional assessment that is being carried out according to the regulation of the new methodology is a new practice, which must be developed carefully and in accordance with the legislation in force. , to perform a real evaluation of prosecutors and placing them in equal and objective conditions.

The prosecutor member of the KLP, Moisi Duda, was the first who, in the capacity of relator of the draft report for the ethical and professional evaluation of the prosecutor Elsa Miha, concluded that this report drawn up by the previous relator, former member Nurihan Seiti, did not is in accordance with the law and regulation. He pointed out that no reasoning was done regarding the scoring and asked the council to return the project report to the relator to complete it or to draft a new project report.

Member Zeqir Hoda said, among other things, that this draft report was signed by a member of the KLP, despite the fact that he no longer held this position and that it could not be changed.

However, Duda's proposal was supported by the majority of KLP members. Member Erind Merkuri, who comes from the ranks of prominent lawyers, who also found that in the presented project reports there are findings that are not analyzed. He asserted that it is difficult to understand how the points set by former rapporteur Seiti were reached. "There is no justification," Merkuri said, and emphasized that there was no justification before the act, and therefore it should be returned to make it understandable and objective for the assessment.

Even the prosecutor member Sokol Stojani found that maximum evaluations were given without verifying the cases. He requested that they return to the Career Development Commission and set standards in the way of evaluation. "We have to be serious in what we do. Let's not pave the way for mediocrity", declared Stojani and emphasized that all four draft reports have problems as they have no justifications.

The chairperson of KLP, Mirela Bogdani, said that it is reasonable that the draft reports be returned for review, as they must be justified according to the law and regulation.

Ajo nënvizoi se këto janë projekt-raportet e para që do të shërbejnë për të krijuar praktikë në vlerësimin e etikës dhe profesionalizmit të prokurorëve për periudhën në vijim, prej nga do të mundësohet dhe metodologjia për pikëzimin.

Vlerësimet etiko-profesionale që janë kryer deri tanimë nga ana e KLP kanë qenë të përshpejtuara, për nevojat e transferimit të prokurorëve apo emërimit të tyre si drejtues. Në disa raste, vlerësimet e mëparshme të KLP janë rrëzuar nga institucionet e vetingut.

Vlerësimet që do të kryhen në vijim janë periodike dhe në të ardhmen do të jenë të vetmet që do kontrollojnë aspektin profesional dhe etik të prokurorëve.

Bogdani hodhi në votim miratimin e tre projekt-akteve të hartuara nga Seiti për vlerësimin etiko profesional të prokuroreve Elsa Miha e Blerta Hamza, si dhe të prokurorit Gëzim Çopa. Dy prej anëtarëve të Këshillit, Vatë Staka dhe Zeqir Hodo votuan për kalimin e këtyre projekt-raporteve të hartuara nga Seiti. Staka deklaroi se nuk ishte dakord me propozimin për kthimin e projekt-raporteve.

“Nuk mund të themi se këshilltarët e mëparshëm nuk kanë punuar mirë, se pastaj mund të themi edhe se vendimet e marra prej tyre nuk janë të drejta”, deklaroi Staka ndër të tjera.

Mërkuri vërejti se në relacionet e Seitit nuk evidentohet se përse dikujt i heq pikët dhe tjetrit ja lë. Sipas tij, duket se subjektet e vlerësimit nuk janë trajtuar në mënyrë të barabartë. Ai theksoi se është në pamundësi të mbrojë raportin e relatores së mëparshme dhe kërkoi të ribëhet.

”Kemi detyrim kushtetues dhe janë praktikat e para e duhet që vlerësimi të bëhet me barazi,” tha Mërkuri.

“Nuk jam në gjendje t’i kuptoj pse i ka shënuar ashtu apo kështu,”  theksoi ai, ndërsa shtoi se “nuk i ka arsyetuar”.

Me votat e shumicës së anëtarëve të KLP-së të pranishëm në mbledhje, u vendos që projekt-raportet të kthehen për t’u hartuar nga fillimi nga relatorët e rinj, me analizën dhe arsyetimet e gjetjeve përkatëse.

Ish-anëtarja e KLP, Nurihan Seiti ishte e paarritshme për t’u pyetur për koment deri në publikimin e këtij shkrimi.

Në vijim u paraqit nga relatori Zeqir Hodo projek-traporti për vlerësimin e prokurores Elfrida Bregova. Ai vërejti se janë verifikuar 16 çështje të përzgjedhura me short dhe 6 të tjera të zgjedhura nga vetë Bregova, që i përkasin periudhës 2017-2019. Dy prej gjetjeve kishin të bënin me faktin se prokurorja Bregova nuk kishte marrë kontakte të drejtpërdrejta me dëshmitarët, viktima apo të pandehurit e çështjeve që kishte hetuar. Po ashtu, ka rezultuar se në dosjet e verifikuara në asnjë rast ajo nuk ka përmendur apo analizuar praktikën unifikuese të gjykatave më të larta, si dhe as të Gjykatës së Strasburgut.

Hodo said that from the assessment procedure it was established that Bregova had a workload. But, when the member Erind Merkuri asked him how much this prosecutor's workload had been, Hodo said that it was found in the accompanying tables, but did not manage to give an answer. At one point, Hodo left to secure the data required for Bregova's shipment.

 

Merkuri observed that the prosecutor claimed that the working conditions had not enabled her to have direct contact with the subjects of the investigation.

Member Moisi Duda concluded that Hodo had reduced four points in the first report due to the lack of contact with the subjects of the investigation, while in the second he had not done so. Hodo defended himself by stating that he had followed the evaluation according to the new methodology the second time.

While Stojani brought to attention that the vetting has affected the prosecutors of the first degree from 2020 onwards and not in the period under evaluation.

"There is no responsible prosecutor who does not work with the witnesses, with the victims of the defendant. The investigation is dynamic. It must be verified how dynamic the prosecutor is", said Stojani.

In the following, there was a debate regarding the prosecutor Bregova's non-use of references from the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court, the Constitutional Court and the Strasbourg Court. Stojani pointed out that there are many prosecutors who use them.

Later, there were debates between prosecutor members Zeqir Hodo and Moisi Duda. Hodo told Duda that he "is not a prosecutor even today". But Duda hit back at Hodo, saying that when he was in the system, he was a teacher. Likewise, Duda described Hodo's assessment as hypocritical, a position that was also supported by Stojani. "It's a joke," said Stojani, among other things.

Hodo said he only did the assessment, but there was no trickery involved.

Member Vatë Staka intervened asking that the debates be held with microphones on so they could be recorded. He said that he will no longer be present at plenary meetings if this rule is not implemented.

When Duda and Hodo were debating about personal aspects between them, the member Arta Mandro left the hall worried and expressing herself. "Big shame! Big shame".

However, Blegora's rating was excellent and in the end, after the votes of the majority of the members reduced her by six points, from 395 points, she was left with 389 points.

Based on the evaluations presented in the draft reports, member Olger Eminaj raised a question about how those prosecutors who perform their work really well and flawlessly, who perform active actions and analyze and reason based on will be evaluated in the jurisprudence of the higher courts.

Due to prolonged debates and discussions, the KLP meeting was postponed until the following day, Wednesday at 11:00./Top Channel/