{"id":51553,"date":"2018-08-14T15:42:05","date_gmt":"2018-08-14T13:42:05","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.reporter.al\/?p=51553"},"modified":"2019-04-23T22:01:26","modified_gmt":"2019-04-23T22:01:26","slug":"pasuria-e-nenes-dhe-e-ish-bashkeshortit-komisioneri-publik-apelon-vendimin-per-gjyqtaren-alma-brati","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/pasuria-e-nenes-dhe-e-ish-bashkeshortit-komisioneri-publik-apelon-vendimin-per-gjyqtaren-alma-brati\/2018\/08\/14\/","title":{"rendered":"Pasuria e n\u00ebn\u00ebs dhe e ish-bashk\u00ebshortit, Komisioneri Publik apelon vendimin p\u00ebr gjyqtaren Alma Brati"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Komisioneri Publik mendon se KPK nuk ka kryer si duhet hetimet mbi pasurit\u00eb e gjykat\u00ebses s\u00eb Shkall\u00ebs s\u00eb Par\u00eb n\u00eb Tiran\u00eb Alma Brati dhe se nuk ka verifikuar n\u00ebse n\u00ebna e saj dhe ish-bashk\u00ebshorti kishin burime t\u00eb ligjshme pasurie. Komisioneri i k\u00ebrkon Kolegjit t\u00eb Posa\u00e7\u00ebm t\u00eb Apelimit rishikimin e\u00a0 dosjes s\u00eb Bratit p\u00ebr kriterin e pasuris\u00eb.\u00a0<!--more--><\/p>\n<figure id=\"attachment_50350\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-50350\" style=\"width: 533px\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reporter.al\/wp-content\/uploads\/seanca-alma-brati.jpg\"><img decoding=\"async\" loading=\"lazy\" class=\"size-large wp-image-50350\" src=\"https:\/\/www.reporter.al\/wp-content\/uploads\/seanca-alma-brati-533x400.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"533\" height=\"400\" data-id=\"50350\" \/><\/a><figcaption id=\"caption-attachment-50350\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Seanca e KPK-s\u00eb ku u lexua vendimi p\u00ebr gjyqtaren Alma Brati | Foto nga : Aleksandra Bogdani<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p>Gjykat\u00ebsja e Shkall\u00ebs s\u00eb Par\u00eb n\u00eb Tiran\u00eb, Alma Brati ia doli t\u00eb kaloj\u00eb vetingun n\u00eb Komisionin e Pavarur t\u00eb Kualifikimit (KPK) megjith\u00ebse me nj\u00eb vler\u00ebsim minimal n\u00eb kriterin e profesionalizmit, por Komisioneri Publik mendon se KPK nuk ka kryer si duhet hetimin dhe se ka neglizhuar t\u00eb verifikoj\u00eb n\u00ebse dy persona t\u00eb lidhur me gjykat\u00ebsen kishin burim t\u00eb ligjsh\u00ebm pasurie.<\/p>\n<p>Komisioneri n\u00eb k\u00ebrkes\u00ebn p\u00ebr rishikim t\u00eb vendimit t\u00eb KPK-s\u00eb drejtuar Kolegjit t\u00eb Posa\u00e7\u00ebm t\u00eb Apelimit (KPA) t\u00eb b\u00ebr\u00eb publike t\u00eb mart\u00ebn, shprehet po ashtu se pasakt\u00ebsit\u00eb e gjetura edhe nga shkalla e par\u00eb e vetingut duheshin interpretuar si deklarim i rrem\u00eb, nd\u00ebrsa i k\u00ebrkon KPA-s\u00eb t\u00eb b\u00ebj\u00eb nj\u00eb hetim t\u00eb plot\u00eb t\u00eb \u00e7\u00ebshjes s\u00eb Bratit mbi kriterin e pasuris\u00eb.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cKomisioneri Publik \u00e7mon se mang\u00ebsit\u00eb e konstatuara n\u00eb hetimin dhe vler\u00ebsimin drejt t\u00eb fakteve nga ana e Komisionit p\u00ebr kontrollin e pasuris\u00eb s\u00eb subjektit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit justifikojn\u00eb rishikimin e vendimit. Mang\u00ebsit\u00eb e v\u00ebrejtura mund t\u00eb rregullohen nga ana e Kolegjit t\u00eb Posa\u00e7\u00ebm t\u00eb Apelimit\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb k\u00ebrkes\u00ebn e Komisionerit Publik Dariel Sina.<\/p>\n<p>Apelimi i konfirmimit t\u00eb gjykat\u00ebses s\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Shkall\u00ebs s\u00eb Par\u00eb n\u00eb Tiran\u00eb, kandidate p\u00ebr K\u00ebshillin e Lart\u00eb Gjyq\u00ebsor, \u00ebsht\u00eb i treti i k\u00ebrkuar nga Komisioneri Publik, i cili \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb nd\u00ebr tre institucionet e rivler\u00ebsimit kalimtar p\u00ebr gjyqtar\u00ebt dhe prokuror\u00ebt e Shqip\u00ebris\u00eb dhe ka p\u00ebr detyr\u00eb p\u00ebrfaq\u00ebsimin e interesit publik gjat\u00eb kryerjes s\u00eb procesit t\u00eb vetingut. M\u00eb her\u00ebt ai ka apeluar vendimet e KPK-s\u00eb p\u00ebr an\u00ebtarin e Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Lart\u00eb Edmond Islamajn dhe kreun e Gjykat\u00ebs Kushtetuese Bashkim Dedja.<\/p>\n<p>Komisioneri po ashtu ka b\u00ebr\u00eb publike se Operacioni Nd\u00ebrkomb\u00ebtar i Monitorimit (ONM), i cili v\u00ebzhgon procesin, i ka k\u00ebrkuar t\u00eb apeloj\u00eb vendimet e KPK-s\u00eb p\u00ebr gjykat\u00ebsit Xhezair Zaganjori, Artur Malaj e Gentian Medja dhe prokurorin Gentjan Osmani.<\/p>\n<p>Vendimi i arsyetuar i Komisionit t\u00eb Pavarur t\u00eb Kualifikimit (KPK) n\u00eb rastin e gjykat\u00ebses Brati gjeti se deklarata e pasuris\u00eb s\u00eb saj ishte me pasakt\u00ebsi, por n\u00eb fund treshja q\u00eb shqyrtoi k\u00ebt\u00eb rast e kryesuar nga Pamela Qirko me relatore Genta Tafa (Bungo) dhe an\u00ebtar Lulzim Hamitaj vler\u00ebsoi se k\u00ebto pasakt\u00ebsi nuk sillnin shkarkimin.<\/p>\n<p>Por Komisioneri Publik Dariel Sina thot\u00eb se hetimi i KPK-s\u00eb sa i p\u00ebrket kriterit t\u00eb pasuris\u00eb nuk ka qen\u00eb i plot\u00eb dhe se arsyetimi i trup\u00ebs q\u00eb shqyrtoi rastin e Bratit duhet t\u00eb rishihet. Sipas tij jan\u00eb \u201ckat\u00ebr shkaqe\u201d, q\u00eb duhej t\u00eb ishin hetuar m\u00eb mir\u00eb nga KPK.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Burimi i pasuris\u00eb s\u00eb n\u00ebn\u00ebs dhe huadh\u00ebn\u00ebses<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Sina shkruan se \u201cKomisioni nuk ka hetuar dhe arsyetuar\u201d mbi burimin e pasuris\u00eb s\u00eb nj\u00eb t\u00eb af\u00ebrmeje t\u00eb gjykat\u00ebses e cila i ka dh\u00ebn\u00eb asaj nj\u00eb hua 25.000 euro dhe as mbi burimin e pasuris\u00eb s\u00eb n\u00ebn\u00ebs s\u00eb gjykat\u00ebses e cila i kishte dhuruar Bratit 1.8 milion lek\u00eb p\u00ebr shlyerjen e k\u00ebsaj huaje.<\/p>\n<p>Huaja dhe dhurimi si\u00e7 del edhe n\u00eb vendimin e zbardhur t\u00eb KPK-s\u00eb ishin b\u00ebr\u00eb p\u00ebr blerjen e nj\u00eb apartamenti n\u00eb vitin 2015 n\u00eb shum\u00ebn 80 mij\u00eb euro. Brati sipas vet\u00ebdeklarimit e ka p\u00ebrballuar blerjen duke marr\u00eb nd\u00ebr t\u00eb tjera edhe nj\u00eb hua 25 mij\u00eb euro nga nj\u00eb e af\u00ebme e saj n\u00eb shkurt t\u00eb vitit 2016 dhe e ka shlyer k\u00ebt\u00eb hua n\u00eb gusht t\u00eb po atij viti me ndihm\u00ebn e nj\u00eb dhurate t\u00eb marr\u00eb nga n\u00ebna.<\/p>\n<p>KPK pasi ka marr\u00eb disa deklarata noteriale e deklarime nga personat e p\u00ebrfshir\u00eb dhe po ashtu edhe disa t\u00eb dh\u00ebna p\u00ebr pasurin\u00eb e tyre si dhe gjendje t\u00eb llogarive bankare p\u00ebr vitin 2006 e t\u00eb ngjashme, i ka cil\u00ebsuar ato t\u00eb rregullta dhe t\u00eb ligjshme.<\/p>\n<p>Por Komisioneri mendon se KPK nuk ka b\u00ebr\u00eb hetim t\u00eb mjaftuesh\u00ebm dhe se n\u00ebna e gjykat\u00ebses e cila i ka dhuruar asaj 1.8 milion dhe po ashtu edhe huadh\u00ebn\u00ebsja duhej t\u00eb ishin hetuar si persona t\u00eb lidhur me gjykat\u00ebsen.<\/p>\n<p>Komisioneri thot\u00eb se justifikimi i pasuris\u00eb i pranuar n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb rast nga KPK ishte i pamjaftuesh\u00ebm. \u201cKonkluzioni i Komisionit, p\u00ebrve\u00e7 faktit se nuk provon ligjshm\u00ebrin\u00eb e burimit, i bazuar n\u00eb pasjen e llogaris\u00eb bankare, vler\u00ebsojm\u00eb se \u00ebsht\u00eb i paplot\u00eb, pasi nuk mb\u00ebshtetet n\u00eb asnj\u00eb analiz\u00eb financiare\u201d, thot\u00eb Komisioneri Sina.<\/p>\n<p>Ai arsyeton se fakti q\u00eb n\u00ebna e subjektit ka pasur nj\u00eb depozit\u00eb bankare me vler\u00eb 12 mij\u00eb euro deri n\u00eb vitin 2006, nuk ishte i mjaftuesh\u00ebm p\u00ebr t\u00eb justifikuar dh\u00ebnien e dhurat\u00ebs me vler\u00eb t\u00eb p\u00ebraf\u00ebrt n\u00eb vitin 2016, pasi nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb llogari ishte mbyllur dhjet\u00eb vjet m\u00eb her\u00ebt. Po ashtu komisioneri thot\u00eb se p\u00ebr shkak t\u00eb shpenzimeve t\u00eb kryera gjat\u00eb periudh\u00ebs 2006-2016 nga dhuruesja p\u00ebrfshi pagesa k\u00ebste kredije, pagesa p\u00ebr qira sht\u00ebpie e t\u00eb ngjashme \u201cdhuruesja ka qen\u00eb n\u00eb pamund\u00ebsi financiare dhe pa asnj\u00eb burim t\u00eb ligjsh\u00ebm p\u00ebr sigurimin e nj\u00eb shume t\u00eb till\u00eb\u201d. \u00a0Komisioneri thot\u00eb se ngjash\u00ebm KPK nuk kishte verifikuar plot\u00ebsisht burimin e pasuris\u00eb s\u00eb huadh\u00ebn\u00ebses, si\u00e7 ka vepruar n\u00eb raste t\u00eb ngjashme.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Burimi i pasuris\u00eb s\u00eb ish-bashk\u00ebshortit<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Po ashtu komisioneri e cil\u00ebsoi t\u00eb paezauruar hetimin n\u00eb lidhje me pensionin ushqimor q\u00eb ish-bashk\u00ebshorti i gjykat\u00ebses i jepte k\u00ebsaj t\u00eb fundit. Komisioneri thot\u00eb se fillimisht kishte nj\u00eb mosp\u00ebrputhje prej 240 mij\u00eb lek\u00ebsh mes shum\u00ebs se p\u00ebrmendur n\u00eb deklarat\u00ebn veting prej 3.1 milion lek\u00ebsh dhe at\u00eb n\u00eb deklaratat periodike ku shuma rezulton 2.9 milion lek\u00eb.<\/p>\n<p>Po ashtu sipas tij Komisioni nuk ka hetuar burimin dhe ligjshm\u00ebrin\u00eb e k\u00ebtyre parave. \u201cP\u00ebr k\u00ebto t\u00eb ardhura nuk ka asnj\u00eb dokument provues mbi v\u00ebrtet\u00ebsin\u00eb dhe ligjshm\u00ebrin\u00eb e tyre, fakt i cili ndikon edhe n\u00eb analiz\u00ebn financiare negative mbi likuiditetet dhe pasurit\u00eb e subjektit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit\u201d, shkruan Sina.<\/p>\n<p>Komisioneri ka kund\u00ebrshtuar arsyetimin e KPK-s\u00eb se gjykat\u00ebsja nuk kishte detyrim t\u00eb shpjegohej p\u00ebr pensionin ushqimor pasi k\u00ebto para p\u00ebrfitoheshin nga f\u00ebmij\u00ebt. Sina thot\u00eb se sipas deklarimeve t\u00eb vet\u00eb subjektit, kjo e ardhur \u00ebsht\u00eb p\u00ebrdorur edhe p\u00ebr q\u00ebllime t\u00eb tjera dhe ka sh\u00ebrbyer si burim krijimi pasurie.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cN\u00eb k\u00ebto kushte, barra p\u00ebr justifikimin e ligjshm\u00ebris\u00eb duhet ti kalonte si subjektit dhe ish-bashk\u00ebshortit t\u00eb saj\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb k\u00ebrkes\u00ebn e apelimit. Nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb sipas Komisionerit as gjykat\u00ebsja as ish-bashk\u00ebshorti i saj nuk provojn\u00eb dot n\u00ebse k\u00ebto t\u00eb ardhura kan\u00eb pasur burim t\u00eb ligjsh\u00ebm.<\/p>\n<p>Duke pranuar se pensioni q\u00eb ish-bashk\u00ebshorti paguante p\u00ebr f\u00ebmij\u00ebt ishte i patatuesh\u00ebm, Komisioneri v\u00ebren se kjo nuk duhej t\u00eb kishte penguar KPK q\u00eb t\u00eb hetonte n\u00ebse burimi i k\u00ebtyre t\u00eb ardhurave ishte i liugjsh\u00ebm. Ai thot\u00eb se ish-bashk\u00ebshorti i Bratit nuk kishte mund\u00ebsi finaciare p\u00ebr t\u00eb garantuar shuma t\u00eb tilla kesh dhe se ai vet\u00eb ka pranuar p\u00ebr KPK \u201cse shum\u00ebn 1.000.000 lek\u00eb e kishte marr\u00eb hua tek disa shok\u00eb\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>Komisioneri thot\u00eb se KPK n\u00eb raste t\u00eb tjera nuk ka pranuar t\u00eb tilla deklarata noteriale dhe se kjo deklarat\u00eb \u201cnuk mund t\u00eb p\u00ebrb\u00ebnte prov\u00eb t\u00eb besueshme dhe t\u00eb pranohej nga Komisioni\u201d.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Pasakt\u00ebsit\u00eb dhe mosdeklarimet<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>M\u00eb tej komisioneri thot\u00eb se Brati ka b\u00ebr\u00eb deklarime periodike t\u00eb rreme dhe jo t\u00eb sakta.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cSubjekti i rivler\u00ebsimit prej deklarimit t\u00eb par\u00eb t\u00eb interesave privat\u00eb (2007) e n\u00eb vijim ka qen\u00eb i pasakt\u00eb dhe ka kryer deklarim t\u00eb rrem\u00eb, reflektuar edhe n\u00eb deklarat\u00ebn \u201cVetting\u201d\u201d, thot\u00eb Sina. Komisioneri thot\u00eb se gjykat\u00ebsja nuk kishte deklaruar nj\u00eb hua n\u00eb shum\u00eb 3200 euro t\u00eb marr\u00eb n\u00eb vitin 2009 dhe as shitjen e nj\u00eb makine n\u00eb 2012 me vler\u00eb 100.000 lek\u00eb. Sipas Komisionerit kjo nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb deklaruar as n\u00eb deklarat\u00ebn \u201cVetting\u201d n\u00eb vitin 2017.<\/p>\n<p>Ve\u00e7 k\u00ebsaj sipas Sin\u00ebs, KPK nuk ka hetuar burimin e ligjsh\u00ebm t\u00eb huas\u00eb prej 3.200 euro me q\u00ebllim rikonstruksionin e nj\u00eb banese t\u00eb bler\u00eb n\u00eb vitin 2002 dhe se p\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb nuk ishte marr\u00eb asnj\u00eb prov\u00eb.<\/p>\n<p>Po ashtu Komisioneri thot\u00eb se KPK nuk ka arsyetuar si\u00e7 duhet sa i p\u00ebrket mosp\u00ebrputhjeve q\u00eb lidhen me k\u00ebt\u00eb banes\u00eb t\u00eb par\u00eb t\u00eb bler\u00eb nga gjykat\u00ebsja dhe t\u00eb af\u00ebrmit e saj n\u00eb fillim t\u00eb viteve 2000.\u00a0 Komisioneri thot\u00eb se ka ndryshime mes kontrat\u00ebs noteriale ku trualli rezulton me sip\u00ebrfaqe 158 m2, nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb q\u00eb sipas certifikat\u00ebs s\u00eb pron\u00ebsis\u00eb \u201cbler\u00ebsit figurojn\u00eb pronar\u00eb t\u00eb sip\u00ebrfaqes 179.84 m2 truall\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>KPK arsyetoi se \u201cse subjekti nuk mund t\u00eb ngarkohet me p\u00ebrgjegj\u00ebsi p\u00ebr veprimet e noterit\u201d duke ia l\u00ebn\u00eb k\u00ebtij t\u00eb fundit \u201cfajin\u201d p\u00ebr pasakt\u00ebsit\u00eb dhe mosp\u00ebrputhjet. Por Komisioneri thot\u00eb se rrethanat duhej t\u00eb detyronin KPK q\u00eb t\u00eb hetonte m\u00eb tej n\u00eb sqarimin e k\u00ebsaj situate pasi noteri kishte deklaruar se \u201cpunonj\u00ebsit e hipotek\u00ebs e b\u00ebnin vet\u00eb ndarjen e pasuris\u00eb s\u00eb tjet\u00ebrsuar nga pjesa tjet\u00ebr q\u00eb i mbetej pronarit\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>Komisioneri theksoi se n\u00eb vitin 2004 kur ishte b\u00ebr\u00eb rregjistrimi, Brati ishte me pun\u00eb pran\u00eb Zyr\u00ebs Vendore t\u00eb Rregjistrimit t\u00eb Pasurive t\u00eb Paluajtshme (ZVRPP). Sipas Sin\u00ebs fakti q\u00eb problemet me k\u00ebt\u00eb kontrat\u00eb dhe rritja e sip\u00ebrfaqes s\u00eb truallit t\u00eb p\u00ebrfituar nga gjykat\u00ebsja dhe familja e saj n\u00eb certifikat\u00eb p\u00ebrkojn\u00eb me periudh\u00ebn 2003-2007 &#8211; kur ajo ishte n\u00eb pun\u00eb pran\u00eb ZVRPP-s\u00eb dhe deklarimet e noterit ishin indicie q\u00eb r\u00ebndonin pozit\u00ebn e gjykat\u00ebses.<\/p>\n<!-- AddThis Advanced Settings generic via filter on the_content --><!-- AddThis Share Buttons generic via filter on the_content -->","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Komisioneri Publik mendon se KPK nuk ka kryer si duhet hetimet mbi pasurit\u00eb e gjykat\u00ebses s\u00eb Shkall\u00ebs s\u00eb Par\u00eb n\u00eb Tiran\u00eb Alma Brati dhe se nuk ka verifikuar n\u00ebse n\u00ebna e saj dhe ish-bashk\u00ebshorti kishin burime t\u00eb ligjshme pasurie. Komisioneri i k\u00ebrkon Kolegjit t\u00eb Posa\u00e7\u00ebm t\u00eb Apelimit rishikimin e\u00a0 dosjes s\u00eb Bratit p\u00ebr kriterin e [&hellip;]<!-- AddThis Advanced Settings generic via filter on get_the_excerpt --><!-- AddThis Share Buttons generic via filter on get_the_excerpt --><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":97,"featured_media":69528,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[13,7],"tags":[],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/www.reporter.al\/wp-content\/uploads\/seanca-alma-brati-533x400.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/51553"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/97"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=51553"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/51553\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":61858,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/51553\/revisions\/61858"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/69528"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=51553"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=51553"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=51553"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}