Prosecutor Marsida Frashëri faces a request for dismissal at the KPA

The Special Appeals Chamber, KPA, was informed on Tuesday, June 3, of the submissions and final conclusions in the vetting case of Shkodra prosecutor Marsida Frashëri. Prosecutor Klodian Braho, authorized by the head of SPAK, Aktin Dumani, to represent this case in the KPA, said that he stood by all the grounds of appeal and requested the change of the Commission's decision to confirm Frashëri and requested her dismissal for problems in the professional aspect and violation of public trust in justice. Frashëri opposed the Public Commissioner's appeal as inadmissible, claiming that the decision to suspend her from duty for one year and send her for training to the School of Magistrates, against which the grounds are raised, according to the subject, is not appealable.

In May 2022, the Independent Qualification Commission, KPK, decided to suspend Frashëri from office for 1 year, with the condition that she attend the training program at the School of Magistrates. The decision was made after during the vetting process, prosecutor Frashëri faced the burden of proof for the professional criterion, regarding the findings in 27 files, when it turned out that she had not carried out investigative actions. The subject stated that she had had a high workload.

During the hearing on May 10, 2022, it was reported that 3 disciplinary investigations had been conducted against Prosecutor Frashëri by the General Prosecutor's Office and that the findings of these investigations had also been reviewed by the KPK, which had found the same problems. One of the investigations had been closed with the decision to demote her for 6 months in 2014, while the other two had been dismissed due to the lack of a legal framework.

The administrative investigation at the first instance of vetting found that criminal proceedings from 2011 and 2013 were shelved by Prosecutor Frashëri, and after transferring these cases to a colleague in 2018, immediate dismissal was requested, as a result of the statute of limitations on the criminal offense. The Commission found that the subject had not carried out any investigative actions, resulting in the statute of limitations on the criminal offense. According to the Commission, despite the fact that Frashëri had previously been warned and disciplinary action had been taken, she continued to exercise her function with deficiencies in the professional aspect, identifying problems in dozens of cases investigated by her.

However, the problems found were not found sufficient for dismissal and Frashëri was sent for re-education at the Magistrates' School. After successfully completing this training, on September 11, 2023, her confirmation in office was decided, a decision that was found unfounded by the Public Commissioner, Florian Ballhysa, who considered that Frashëri was unsuitable to continue in office and that she had undermined public trust in justice.

Unlike the KPK, prosecutor Klodian Braho said on Tuesday that he believes that the subject has seriously undermined public trust in justice with its actions and inactions, and that it has failed to prove the opposite of the burden of proof.

He brought to the attention of the College that the subject, even after the administrative investigations previously conducted against her, has continued to act in violation of the law. Braho argued that Frashëri's actions and inactions have had a direct impact and that her deep shortcomings could not be corrected. According to Braho, it results that the subject has undermined public trust in justice and that she should be considered inappropriate and caused by duty.

Prosecutor Marsida Frashëri argued that the entire appeal revolves around the interim decision of the KPK, for its suspension. She claimed that this decision is final and binding and according to constitutional provisions cannot be appealed.

Frashëri brought to the attention of the College that she had received positive feedback on her figure and wealth, which she said showed that there were no problems. She also noted that the International Monitoring Operation had not issued any recommendations in her case.

She claimed that the arguments of the Public Commissioner violate the principle of res judicata. Regarding the reason for violating public trust, she underlined that the complaint was made only for one criterion, that of professionalism.

Regarding the findings made regarding the failure to conduct investigations, the subject claimed that she had a workload several times greater than her colleagues. She requested that the complaint be dismissed.

After the submissions, the parties were invited for the final conclusions. Both Braho and Frashëri stated that they stood by their submissions and research. Meanwhile, prosecutor Braho submitted before the College that intermediate decisions, according to the legislation in force, are appealed together with the final decision. According to him, there is no definition in the law or in the Constitution that it is unappealable. According to Braho, in cases where a decision is unappealable, it is clearly defined in the legislation or in the Constitution.

In conclusion, Braho requested the dismissal of Frashëri, while the latter requested that the confirmation be upheld. “I stand by my counter-appeal that the Public Commissioner's appeal is unconstitutional,” declared prosecutor Marsida Frashëri.

The panel closed the judicial review and announced that the decision will be announced on June 10, at 3:00 PM. Reporter.al