New structure for SPAK control, Dumani clashes with Ulsi Manja: You are risking bureaucratic overload

SPAK leader Altin Dumani clashed with Justice Minister Ulsi Manja over the proposal to establish a new structure to control the Special Prosecution Office. Dumani stated that SPAK is now subject to supervision by the KLP and ILD.

The Head of the Special Prosecution Office emphasized that the creation of these new evaluation structures would risk creating bureaucratic overload.

Altin Dumani: After we have become familiar with the recommendations, I cannot help but mention some elements, some of our findings.

The recommendations are not accompanied by statistical data, comparative analysis or concrete indicators that justify the need for intervention.

This lack makes the recommendations seem subjective and difficult to measure, especially for SPAK, which operates on the basis of efficiency, results, and public credibility.

Some of the recommendations use general terms such as proactive investigations, strengthening the strategic approach, but do not provide any operational definitions.

This creates uncertainty for practical implementation and may lead to different interpretation by implementing institutions.

Another recommendation that I see, although in the assessment of our institution it is not related to priorities and the fight against crime, but is what you say in your recommendations “need for respect for existing control mechanisms”. Strengthening of internal control mechanisms is recommended. SPAK, already subject to supervision by the KLP, ILD, the creation of new assessment and integrity structures without analysis of existing mechanisms risks bringing about a bureaucratic overload.

Some of the recommendations are very general and do not define measurable objectives, responsible institutions or concrete resources, risking remaining unimplementable. I said this to make it clear, because at the end of each year we also report on the implementation of the recommendations of the Council of Ministers.

So, of course, in their entirety, the recommendations are welcome and we express our maximum commitment as an institution to ensure that these recommendations are a priority in the institution's work, but on the other hand, some of them, due to the way they are formulated or conceived from a practical point of view, present difficulties in implementation.

And I am already finding difficulties in how I will report on the fulfillment of these recommendations.

 

The Minister's speech:

The recommendations are in 8 areas

The first area is respect for human rights, which should be at the heart of the prosecution's work. It requires respect for the presumption of innocence. Respect for the procedural rights of defendants and victims. Avoidance of unjustified delays in investigations and the proportional use of security measures.

The rule of law starts from a fair and impartial investigation, the prosecution is oriented to promote the use of special procedures, such as plea agreements and summary trials, especially for minors and in cases where punishment can be given through effective alternatives.

The second area is strengthening the fight against crime. It requires an increase in the number of investigations initiated primarily, effective prosecution of corruption, especially at high levels, and financial investigations of criminal origin. International cooperation should be strengthened, especially in the fight against trafficking and organized crime.

The third area is integrity, transparency and accountability. The prosecution should strengthen mechanisms for internal control and accountability beyond the vetting process. Any complaints of inappropriate behavior should be treated seriously and transparency for citizens should be increased.

The fourth area is efficiency and building functional capacities. It requires the creation of specialized structures for complex issues, investment in technology and human resources, and the development of continuous training.

The fifth area is the use of modern investigative methods, suggesting the use of artificial intelligence, digital technology and data analysis. To intensify proactive investigative methods including wiretapping, financial means and electronic surveillance and cooperation with the state police and judicial police.

The sixth area is cooperation with the Ministry of Justice. We are ready to cooperate closely on drafting criminal policies, exchanging statistics, improving international legal assistance. I would like to confirm that the cooperation of the Ministry of Justice with the General Prosecutor's Office and SPAK in terms of international legal assistance, but also the exchange of statistical data is at a satisfactory level.

The seventh area concerns inter-institutional cooperation. It focuses on the drafting of a coordinated strategy between the General Prosecutor's Office, SPAK, the state police and other public institutions. Agreements on data exchange, the designation of contact points and inter-institutional transparency are key to success in combating crime.

The eighth area is international cooperation. Active participation in Eurojust, Europol and Empact is essential for tackling cross-border crime. The creation of joint investigation teams is the most effective means of sharing evidence in real time and prosecuting cross-border crime.