{"id":56012,"date":"2019-02-09T17:19:01","date_gmt":"2019-02-09T15:19:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.reporter.al\/?p=56012"},"modified":"2019-05-06T23:20:00","modified_gmt":"2019-05-06T23:20:00","slug":"konflikt-interesi-e-deklarime-te-rreme-kpk-kapi-alltun-celen-me-fjalet-e-tij","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/konflikt-interesi-e-deklarime-te-rreme-kpk-kapi-alltun-celen-me-fjalet-e-tij\/2019\/02\/09\/","title":{"rendered":"Konflikt interesi e deklarime t\u00eb rreme, KPK \u201ckapi\u201d Alltun \u00c7el\u00ebn me fjal\u00ebt e tij"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Kryegjykat\u00ebsi i Sarand\u00ebs Alltun \u00c7ela u penalizua p\u00ebr shkak t\u00eb q\u00ebndrimeve t\u00eb ndryshme para Komisionit t\u00eb Pavarur t\u00eb Kualifikimit rreth pasurive. \u00c7ela u gjet nga KPK i pap\u00ebrshtatsh\u00ebm dhe i paaft\u00eb.<!--more--><\/p>\n<figure id=\"attachment_55120\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-55120\" style=\"width: 533px\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\"><img decoding=\"async\" loading=\"lazy\" class=\"size-large wp-image-55120\" src=\"https:\/\/www.reporter.al\/wp-content\/uploads\/seanca-alltun-cela-533x400.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"533\" height=\"400\" data-id=\"55120\" \/><figcaption id=\"caption-attachment-55120\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Trupa gjykuese e p\u00ebrb\u00ebr\u00eb nga Genta Tafa, Pamela Qirko dhe Xhensila Pine, gjat\u00eb seanc\u00ebs d\u00ebgjimore t\u00eb kreut te gjykatws Sarand\u00eb, Alltun \u00c7ela | Foto : BIRN<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p>Vendimi i zbardhur i Komisionit t\u00eb Pavarur t\u00eb Kualifikimit tregon se kryetari i shkarkuar i Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Sarand\u00ebs Alltun \u00c7ela, u penalizua gjat\u00eb procesit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit nga fjal\u00ebt e tij. T\u00eb pakt\u00ebn tre her\u00eb, v\u00ebren n\u00eb vendim KPK, \u00c7ela b\u00ebri \u201cdeklarim t\u00eb rrem\u00eb p\u00ebrpara Komisionit\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>Megjithat\u00eb, sipas vendimit, shkarkimi i gjykat\u00ebsit u vendos pasi ai u gjet me shkelje n\u00eb t\u00eb tre kriteret. KPK shprehet se \u00c7ela b\u00ebri deklarim \u201ct\u00eb pamjaftuesh\u00ebm n\u00eb kriterin e pasuris\u00eb\u201d, ishte i \u201cpap\u00ebrshtatsh\u00ebm n\u00eb kriterin e past\u00ebrtis\u00eb s\u00eb figur\u00ebs\u201d dhe po ashtu u konsiderua me \u201ccil\u00ebsi t\u00eb papranueshme n\u00eb pun\u00eb, gjykim t\u00eb dob\u00ebt dhe nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb efektiv\u201d. KPK thot\u00eb se k\u00ebto probleme nuk mund t\u00eb ndryshoheshin nga \u201critrajnimi p\u00ebr nj\u00eb vit n\u00eb Shkoll\u00ebn e Magjistratur\u00ebs\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>Trupa gjykuese q\u00eb hetoi \u00c7el\u00ebn u kryesua nga Pamela Qirko, me relatore Genta Tafa (Bungo) dhe an\u00ebtare Xhensila Pine, vendosi shkarkimin e tij p\u00ebr \u201cdeklarim t\u00eb pamjaftuesh\u00ebm\u201d n\u00eb kriterin e pasuris\u00eb dhe \u201cc\u00ebnim t\u00eb besimit t\u00eb publikut te drejt\u00ebsia\u201d<\/p>\n<p>\u00c7ela u shortua si subjekt i procesit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit n\u00eb 15 janar 2018, p\u00ebr shkak t\u00eb funksionit t\u00eb tij n\u00eb krye t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Rrethit Gjyq\u00ebsor Sarand\u00eb. Gjat\u00eb seanc\u00ebs d\u00ebgjimore ai kund\u00ebrshtori gjetjet e KPK n\u00eb lidhje me pasurin\u00eb e tij dhe po ashtu ka kund\u00ebrshtuar raportin e DSIK-s\u00eb mbi past\u00ebrtin\u00eb e figur\u00ebs, duke n\u00ebnvizuar se ai nuk p\u00ebrmban prova.\u00a0 Ai ngriti pretendim se KPK kishte b\u00ebr\u00eb nj\u00eb lapsus, pasi sipas tij KLD e kishte vler\u00ebsuar me not\u00eb mesatare \u2013 p\u00ebr sa i p\u00ebrket aft\u00ebsive profesionale dhe jo n\u00ebn mesatare.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Pasurit\u00eb me vendim gjykatave q\u00eb drejtonte<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Dy prej pasurive q\u00eb p\u00ebrmenden n\u00eb vendim dhe q\u00eb u cil\u00ebsuan si problematike nga Komisioni, jan\u00eb p\u00ebrfituar p\u00ebrmes vendimeve gjyq\u00ebsore n\u00eb gjykatat ku \u00c7ela ishte an\u00ebtar dhe m\u00eb pas kryetar.<\/p>\n<p>Vendimi i zbardhur i KPK-s\u00eb zbulon se sht\u00ebpia e trash\u00ebguar nga babai ishte rregjistruar pas nj\u00eb padie n\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebn e Delvin\u00ebs n\u00eb koh\u00ebn kur \u00c7ela ishte kryetar i k\u00ebsaj gjykate. Po ashtu nj\u00eb sht\u00ebpi n\u00eb Sarand\u00eb, me sip\u00ebrfaqe 220 metra katror\u00eb, u p\u00ebrfitua ligj\u00ebrisht pas nj\u00eb vendimi t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Sarand\u00ebs n\u00eb koh\u00ebn kur \u00c7ela ishte kryetar i saj.<\/p>\n<p>Vendimi i zbardhur thot\u00eb se n\u00eb t\u00eb dyja rastet \u00c7ela ishte n\u00eb konflikt interesi dhe se vendimet ishin marr\u00eb mjaft shpejt p\u00ebrndryshe nga sa b\u00ebhej n\u00eb raste t\u00eb ngjashme.<\/p>\n<p>Sa i p\u00ebrket sht\u00ebpis\u00eb n\u00eb nj\u00eb fshat n\u00eb Delvin\u00eb Komisioni thot\u00eb se mbetej e paqart\u00eb m\u00ebnyra e p\u00ebrfitimit t\u00eb pron\u00ebsis\u00eb, nd\u00ebrsa kishte ndryshime mes deklarimeve t\u00eb \u00c7el\u00ebs, vendimit t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs Delvin\u00eb n\u00eb vitin 1995 dhe Aktit t\u00eb Marrjes s\u00eb Tok\u00ebs n\u00eb Pron\u00ebsi (AMTP).<\/p>\n<p>N\u00eb vendim rezulton se para Komisioni \u00c7ela pretendoi se sht\u00ebpia ishte \u201chistorike e nd\u00ebrtuar n\u00eb breza nga struktura e familjes time. K\u00ebtu nuk kemi fitim prone, por vet\u00ebm nj\u00eb formalitet teknik, juridik dhe ekonomik t\u00eb pron\u00ebs t\u00eb trash\u00ebguar dhe p\u00ebr m\u00eb tep\u00ebr nuk kemi p\u00ebrdorim t\u00eb burimeve financiare.\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>Por vendimi i gjykat\u00ebs, q\u00eb n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb koh\u00eb kryesohej nga \u00c7ela \u00ebsht\u00eb i ndrysh\u00ebm aty thuhet se K. \u00c7, babai i ndjer\u00eb i gjykat\u00ebsit t\u00eb shkarkuar, e kishte nd\u00ebrtuar me forcat e tij nj\u00eb sht\u00ebpi banimi q\u00eb prej vitit 1956. \u201cPadit\u00ebsi K.\u00c7. sht\u00ebpin\u00eb n\u00eb fjal\u00eb e ka nd\u00ebrtuar konform rregullave, me leje t\u00eb organeve shtet\u00ebrore t\u00eb asaj kohe, pas daljes nga burgu, mbasi para burgosjes s\u00eb tij nuk ka patur sht\u00ebpi.\u201d, citohet prej Komisionit vendimi i gjykat\u00ebs Delvin\u00eb.<\/p>\n<p>K\u00ebto q\u00ebndrime t\u00eb \u00c7el\u00ebs u cil\u00ebsuan nga KPK si \u201cdeklarim i rrem\u00eb\u201d. Komisioni po ashtu vuri n\u00eb dyshim sip\u00ebrfaqen e p\u00ebrfituar pasi nga hetimi rezultoi se ajo ishte 500 metra n\u00eb AMTP dhe rezultonte 600 metra n\u00eb vendimin e Gjykat\u00ebs Delvin\u00eb. \u201cMe gjith\u00eb shpjegimet e subjektit, p\u00ebr Komisionin mbetet e paqart\u00eb se si sht\u00ebpia e p\u00ebrcaktuar prej 500 m\u00b2 n\u00eb AMTP, u regjistrua me vendimin e Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Rrethit Gjyq\u00ebsor Delvin\u00eb me sip\u00ebrfaqen prej 600 m\u00b2\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendimin e zbardhur.<\/p>\n<p>KPK thot\u00eb se mosp\u00ebrputhja u gjet n\u00eb dokumentet e dor\u00ebzuara nga vet\u00eb \u00c7ela, por ky i fundit nuk qe n\u00eb gjendje t\u00eb shpjegonte se pse vendimi i gjykat\u00ebs kishte 100 metra t\u00eb tjera plus.\u00a0 N\u00eb t\u00eb nj\u00ebjt\u00ebn pik\u00eb Komisioni thot\u00eb se nuk mori shpjegim t\u00eb arsyesh\u00ebm p\u00ebr konfliktin e interesit, nd\u00ebrsa \u00c7ela edhe pse gjyqtar q\u00eb prej muajit mars, \u201cp\u00ebr t\u00eb arsyetuar marr\u00ebdh\u00ebniet juridike t\u00eb ndodhura n\u00eb vitin 1995, i referohet legjislacionit t\u00eb vitit 1996\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>\u00c7ela u mbrojt duke pretenduar se \u201cpavar\u00ebsisht se un\u00eb isha n\u00eb detyr\u00ebn e drejtuesit t\u00eb gjykat\u00ebs nuk kishte penges\u00eb ligjore q\u00eb babai im t\u00eb mos ushtronte nj\u00eb t\u00eb drejt\u00eb n\u00eb gjykat\u00eb\u201d. KPK pranoi pjes\u00ebrisht k\u00ebt\u00eb arsyetim.<\/p>\n<p>N\u00eb vendim pranohet se babai i gjyqtarit kishte t\u00eb drejt\u00eb dhe legjitimohej t\u00eb padiste p\u00ebr fitimin e pron\u00ebsis\u00eb n\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebn e Delvin\u00ebs, por sipas KPK gjykat\u00ebsi nj\u00ebkoh\u00ebsisht kryetar gjykate duhej t\u00eb merrte masa p\u00ebr t\u00eb shmangur konfliktin e mundsh\u00ebm t\u00eb interesit.<\/p>\n<p>KPK ngriti dyshime p\u00ebr faktin se vendimi i gjykat\u00ebs n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb rast ishte marr\u00eb\u00a0 p\u00ebr 6 dit\u00eb nga padia.\u00a0\u00a0 \u201cDuke shkaktuar k\u00ebshtu nj\u00eb konflikt interesi t\u00eb pakt\u00ebn n\u00eb dukje, t\u00eb nxitur edhe m\u00eb shum\u00eb nga shpejt\u00ebsia me t\u00eb cil\u00ebn u vendos ky rast dhe u vendos n\u00eb favor t\u00eb babait t\u00eb subjektit\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendimin e KPK.<\/p>\n<p>Nga vendimi i zbardhur rezulton se nj\u00eb situat\u00eb e ngjashme u p\u00ebrs\u00ebrit 18 vjet m\u00eb von\u00eb n\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebn e Sarand\u00ebs. \u00c7ela, i cili ishte n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb koh\u00eb kryetar i k\u00ebsaj gjykate, ngriti padi ndaj Bashkis\u00eb Sarand\u00eb p\u00ebr njohje t\u00eb pron\u00ebsis\u00eb mbi nj\u00eb godin\u00eb 220 metra katror\u00eb, e pasqyruar 110 metra n\u00eb vendimin e gjykat\u00ebs. Gjykata doli me vendim n\u00eb favor t\u00eb kryetarit t\u00eb saj vet\u00ebm 20 dit\u00eb pas rregjistrimit t\u00eb padis\u00eb. \u201cKomisioni konstaton p\u00ebrs\u00ebri shpejt\u00ebsi jo t\u00eb zakonshme n\u00eb procedurat gjyq\u00ebsore t\u00eb ndjekura n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb rast\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendim.<\/p>\n<p>Nisur nga situata Komisioni ngriti dyshime p\u00ebr konflikt interesi. \u201cK\u00ebto dyshime bazohen n\u00eb faktin q\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb kryetari i gjykat\u00ebs ai q\u00eb shorton \u00e7\u00ebshtjet e ardhura n\u00eb gjykat\u00eb, si dhe n\u00eb faktin q\u00eb gjyqtari i \u00e7\u00ebshtjes \u00ebsht\u00eb i nj\u00ebjti q\u00eb ka marr\u00eb pjes\u00eb si ndihm\u00ebsgjyqtar n\u00eb vendimin nr. ***, dat\u00eb 12.10.1995 t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Rrethit Gjyq\u00ebsor Delvin\u00eb, q\u00eb ka njohur si pronar t\u00eb sht\u00ebpis\u00eb n\u00eb fshatin *** babain e subjektit\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendimin e KPK.<\/p>\n<p>\u00c7ela e kund\u00ebrshtoi k\u00ebt\u00eb gjetje duke pretenduar se t\u00eb gjithat rast \u201cku pal\u00eb kan\u00eb qen\u00eb gjyqtar\u00ebt e k\u00ebsaj gjykate, proceset jan\u00eb zhvilluar n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb gjykat\u00eb\u201d. \u00a0Ai po ashtu solli n\u00eb v\u00ebmendje nj\u00eb vendim t\u00eb KLD-s\u00eb t\u00eb n\u00ebntorit 2018, sipas t\u00eb cilit edhe kur pal\u00eb ishte gjykat\u00ebsi \u00e7\u00ebshtja mund t\u00eb gjykohej nga ajo gjykat\u00eb. Gjithashtu ai vendosi n\u00eb dispozicion edhe tre vendime t\u00eb ngjashme me pal\u00eb koleg\u00eb t\u00eb tij n\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebn e Sarand\u00ebs.<\/p>\n<p>Megjithat\u00eb KPK aryestoi se q\u00ebndrimi ishte i pabazuar. Duke u nisur nga vendimi i KLD-s\u00eb Komisioni b\u00ebri t\u00eb qart\u00eb se rasti i n\u00ebntorit 2018 ishte nj\u00eb p\u00ebrjashtim nga rregulli.\u00a0 \u201cKLD-ja deri m\u00eb sot ka mbajtur q\u00ebndrimin q\u00eb ka deleguar gjyqtar\u00eb nga gjykatat e tjera n\u00eb situata t\u00eb tilla t\u00eb procedur\u00ebs civile\u201d, citohet vendimi i KLD-s\u00eb n\u00eb t\u00eb cilin pranohet ndryshimi p\u00ebr situat\u00ebn aktuale, por rekomandohet q\u00eb vendimi \u201cduhet t\u00eb jet\u00eb shum\u00eb mir\u00eb i arsyetuar\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cKjo do t\u00eb thot\u00eb se justifikimi i subjektit me q\u00ebndrimin e KLD-s\u00eb n\u00eb raste t\u00eb ngjashme, nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb i v\u00ebrtet\u00eb, sepse praktika ka ndryshuar n\u00eb vitin 2018, nd\u00ebrsa vendimi i Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Rrethit Gjyq\u00ebsor Sarand\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb i vitit 2013\u201d, thuhet m\u00eb tej n\u00eb vendimin e zbardhur, n\u00eb t\u00eb cilin arsyetohet se kjo vendimarrje \u00ebsht\u00eb \u201cn\u00eb kushtet e konfliktit t\u00eb interesit\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cP\u00ebr m\u00eb tep\u00ebr, n\u00eb kushtet kur pala k\u00ebrkuese\/padit\u00ebsi \u00ebsht\u00eb kryetar i Gjykat\u00ebs q\u00eb shqyrton k\u00ebrkes\u00ebn\/padin\u00eb e tij, si dhe epror i gjyqtarit t\u00eb \u00e7\u00ebshtjes, p\u00ebr syt\u00eb e publikut, por dhe p\u00ebr t\u00eb garantuar paanshm\u00ebrin\u00eb n\u00eb gjykim, duhej t\u00eb ishte k\u00ebrkuar delegimi i nj\u00eb gjyqtari nga nj\u00eb rreth tjet\u00ebr gjyq\u00ebsor\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendim.<\/p>\n<p>Komisioni n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb rast konstatoi edhe nj\u00eb mori paqart\u00ebsish sa i p\u00ebrket sip\u00ebrfaqes s\u00eb banes\u00ebs. Sipas vendimit t\u00eb zbardhur sip\u00ebrfaqja e deklaruar nga Alltun \u00c7ela n\u00eb \u201cDeklarat\u00ebn Veting\u201d\u00a0 \u201c110 dhe 48.9 metra , ishte e ndryshme nga ajo e njohur n\u00eb vendimin e Gjykat\u00ebs dhe e ndryshme nga ajo e deklaruar prej \u00c7el\u00ebs gjat\u00eb pyetjeve t\u00eb KPK-s\u00eb.<\/p>\n<p>Vendimi b\u00ebn me dije se paqart\u00ebsit\u00eb u shtuan prej deklarimit t\u00eb \u00c7el\u00ebs se kishte dh\u00ebn\u00eb me qira nipit sip\u00ebrfaqen prej 48.9 metra katror\u00eb t\u059d\u00eb sht\u00ebpis\u00eb, e cila praktikisht nuk ekzistonte m\u00eb n\u00eb vitin kur ishte dh\u00ebn\u00eb me qira 2008, pasi subjekti kishte nd\u00ebrtuar katin shtes\u00eb dhe zgjeruar katin e par\u00eb n\u00eb 110 metra n\u00eb vitin 2005.<\/p>\n<p>Sipas vendimit pasuria \u00ebsht\u00eb v\u00ebn\u00eb n\u00eb vitin 1995 dhe ka pasur 8 bashk\u00ebpronar q\u00eb kan\u00eb bler\u00eb nj\u00eb objekt ekzistues dhe kan\u00eb pjes\u00ebtuar secili nga\u00a0 48.9 metra katror\u00eb. Nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb hetimi i Komisionit zbuloi se mbi sip\u00ebrfaqen 48.9 metra \u00c7ela kishte nd\u00ebrtuar nj\u00eb kat t\u00eb dyt\u00eb 110 metra katror\u00eb.<\/p>\n<p>\u00c7ela shpjegoi se n\u00eb fakt n\u00eb pron\u00ebsin\u00eb e tij q\u00eb n\u00eb fillim kishte pasur m\u00eb shum\u00eb metra, por nj\u00eb pjes\u00eb kishte qen\u00eb ballkon q\u00eb nuk ishte rregjistruar n\u00eb pron\u00ebsi t\u00eb tij fillimisht pasi ballkonet nuk rregjistroheshin. Nj\u00eb pjes\u00eb truall ai pretendoi se edhe pse i p\u00ebrkiste atij edhe pse nuk ishte pjes\u00ebtuar dhe ishte sh\u00ebnuar si pasuri e p\u00ebrbashk\u00ebt. \u00a0T\u00eb treja bashk\u00eb k\u00ebto sipas tij ishin 110 metra.<\/p>\n<p>Pretendimit t\u00eb KPK-s\u00eb se kishte fshehur sip\u00ebrfaqen prej rreth 61 metra katror\u00eb n\u00eb katin e par\u00eb dhe p\u00ebrshtatjen e saj p\u00ebr banim \u00c7ela e kund\u00ebrshtoi duke pretenduar se\u00a0 sipas planvendosjes qart\u00ebsohet sip\u00ebrfaqja e banes\u00ebs, p\u00ebr t\u00eb dy katet e pandryshuar si n\u00eb vitin 1995. \u201cQart\u00ebsisht nuk ka fshehje dhe mosdeklarim t\u00eb sip\u00ebrfaqes 61.1 m\u00b2. Kjo sip\u00ebrfaqe q\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb brenda sip\u00ebrfaqes s\u00eb katit t\u00eb par\u00eb prej 110 m\u00b2.\u201d, u shpreh ai.<\/p>\n<p>Komisioni nuk i gjeti fort bind\u00ebse k\u00ebto argumente. KPK shprehet n\u00eb vendim se nd\u00ebr t\u00eb tjera as n\u00eb deklaratat periodike dhe as n\u00eb \u201cDeklarimin Veting\u201d gjykat\u00ebsi nuk kishte p\u00ebrmendur pron\u00ebsi mbi 110 metra, por vet\u00ebm at\u00eb mbi 48.9 metra. Po ashtu KPK thot\u00eb se edhe n\u00eb vendimin e Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Sarand\u00ebs p\u00ebrmendej vet\u00ebm pron\u00ebsia mbi shtes\u00ebn 110 metra. As Zyra e Rregjistrimit t\u00eb Pasurive t\u00eb Paluajtshme Sarand\u00eb nuk kishte sjell\u00eb v\u00ebrtetim p\u00ebr pasuri shtes\u00eb.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cP\u00ebr her\u00eb t\u00eb par\u00eb, subjekti ka deklaruar sip\u00ebrfaqen e plot\u00eb prej 220 m\u00b2 vet\u00ebm n\u00eb p\u00ebrgjigje t\u00eb pyet\u00ebsorit t\u00eb b\u00ebr\u00eb nga ana e Komisionit, m\u00eb dat\u00eb 05.11.2018. Madje p\u00ebr her\u00eb t\u00eb par\u00eb Komisionit i \u00ebsht\u00eb v\u00ebn\u00eb n\u00eb dispozicion kartela e pasuris\u00eb p\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb pron\u00eb, ku tek kuadrati \u201cp\u00ebrshkrim i ve\u00e7ant\u00eb\u201d pasqyrohet n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb t\u00eb detajuar \u201csip\u00ebrfaqe trualli 110 m\u00b2 dhe banes\u00eb dykat\u00ebshe me sip\u00ebrfaqe nd\u00ebrtimi dhe trualli 110 m\u00b2 p\u00ebr kat\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendimin e zbardhur.<\/p>\n<p>KPK gjetoi po ashtu probleme me lejen e nd\u00ebrtimit p\u00ebr shtes\u00ebn e b\u00ebr\u00eb. Sipas vendimit \u00c7ela kishte mar\u00eb leje p\u00ebr rikonstruksion por kishte b\u00ebr\u00eb nd\u00ebrtim t\u00eb ri. Gjykat\u00ebsi i shkarkuar pretendoi se kjo ishte vet\u00ebm nj\u00eb gabim i institucioneve. KPK megjithat\u00eb doli n\u00eb p\u00ebrfundimin se n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb rast gjykat\u00ebsi kishte b\u00ebr\u00eb deklarim t\u00eb rrem\u00eb, ka c\u00ebnuar figur\u00ebn e gjyqtarit duke b\u00ebr\u00eb nd\u00ebrtim pa leje, ka kryer fshehje t\u00eb 61 metrave dhe ka ushtruar funksionin e krye gjyqtarit n\u00eb konflikt intersi.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Njohje pronash n\u00eb Parkun Komb\u00ebtar t\u00eb Butrintit <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deklarimet e Alltun \u00c7el\u00ebs u p\u00ebrdor\u00ebn kund\u00ebr tij edhe n\u00eb dy kriteret e tjera t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit. Kur iu kalua barra e prov\u00ebs rreth nj\u00eb denoncimi t\u00eb p\u00ebrmendur n\u00eb raportin e DSIK-s\u00eb, Komisioni thot\u00eb se pavar\u00ebsisht se informacioni nuk p\u00ebrmende emra \u00c7ela u p\u00ebrgjigj dhe identifikoi pik\u00ebrisht \u00e7\u00ebshtjen p\u00ebr t\u00eb cil\u00ebn ishte i dyshuar.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cKomisioni konstaton se subjekti, megjith\u00ebse \u00ebsht\u00eb ndodhur p\u00ebrpara nj\u00eb informacioni t\u00eb klasifikuar, arrin t\u00eb diferencoj\u00eb nga moria e \u00e7\u00ebshtjeve q\u00eb ka shqyrtuar, vet\u00ebm nj\u00eb prej tyre, me k\u00ebt\u00eb objekt. Pasi ka sqaruar n\u00eb shpjegimet e tij procedurat q\u00eb ka ndjekur, subjekti e ka vler\u00ebsuar k\u00ebt\u00eb informacion t\u00eb klasifikuar si shpifje dhe ofendim p\u00ebr t\u00eb. Por ai nuk arrin t\u00eb sqaroj\u00eb p\u00ebrse ka p\u00ebrzgjedhur k\u00ebt\u00eb rast p\u00ebr t\u00eb sqaruar\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendimin e zbardhur.<\/p>\n<p>Sipas KPK-s\u00eb ky ishte vet\u00ebm nj\u00eb nga vendimet p\u00ebr t\u00eb cilat \u00c7ela akuzohej. Sipas raportit t\u00eb DSIK n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb rast \u201cA. \u00c7ela ka marr\u00eb nj\u00eb shum\u00eb t\u00eb caktuar parash p\u00ebr ndryshimin e mas\u00ebs s\u00eb siguris\u00eb s\u00eb nj\u00eb shtetasi t\u00eb akuzuar p\u00ebr nd\u00ebrtim pa leje, shkat\u00ebrrim prone, mospagim taksash dhe fshehje t\u00eb ardhurash\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>KPK thot\u00eb se gjeti q\u00eb pasi kishte vendosur nj\u00eb mas\u00eb sigurie me burg p\u00ebr t\u00eb akuzuarin, \u00c7ela e kishte ndryshuar k\u00ebt\u00eb mas\u00eb pes\u00eb dit\u00eb m\u00eb von\u00eb. Informacioni n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb rast p\u00ebrfshin edhe nj\u00eb person t\u00eb dyt\u00eb, i cili sipas KPK rezultoi po ashtu si denoncues i gjyqtarit dhe i p\u00ebrfshir\u00eb n\u00eb raportet e DSIK-s\u00eb. Sipas KPK b\u00ebhej fjal\u00eb p\u00ebr nj\u00eb funksionar t\u00eb urbanistik\u00ebs t\u00eb d\u00ebnuar p\u00ebr \u201cshp\u00ebrdorim detyre\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>KPK shprehet se gjyqtari e kishte d\u00ebnuar personin H.M me 3 vjet burg, nj\u00eb vit m\u00eb shum\u00eb se sa kishte k\u00ebrkuar prokuroria. \u00c7\u00ebshtja ishte prishur n\u00eb Apel. Nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb megjith\u00ebse e kishte d\u00ebnuar dhe shprehej se do ta d\u00ebnonte s\u00ebrish se \u201cSaranda \u00ebsht\u00eb b\u00ebr\u00eb nj\u00eb katrahur\u00eb e v\u00ebrtet\u00eb\u201d, \u00c7ela e kishte thirrur t\u00eb d\u00ebnuarin si ekspert n\u00eb disa raste, p\u00ebrfshi edhe rastin e m\u00ebsip\u00ebrm kur ndryshimi i mas\u00ebs s\u00eb siguris\u00eb u b\u00eb bazuar mbi nj\u00eb ekspertiz\u00eb t\u00eb k\u00ebtij personi.<\/p>\n<p>KPK vuri n\u00eb dyshim arsyetimin e gjykat\u00ebsit n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb rast, i cili nga nj\u00eb an\u00eb e gjykonte eksperti e urbanistik\u00ebs fajtor\u00eb p\u00ebr katrahur\u00ebn n\u00eb Sarand\u00eb dhe n\u00eb an\u00ebn tjet\u00ebr e th\u00ebrriste at\u00eb si ekspert n\u00eb vendime q\u00eb u gjet\u00ebn problematike.<\/p>\n<p>Komisioni po ashtu vuri n\u00eb dukje se n\u00eb nj\u00eb rast, pas nj\u00eb akuze n\u00eb raportin e DSIK-s\u00eb se \u00c7ela kishte favorizuar dy t\u00eb akuzuar p\u00ebr trafik klandestin\u00ebsh, Gjykata e Sarand\u00ebs q\u00eb drejtohej prej tij nuk vuri n\u00eb dispozicion vendimet. \u00c7ela i mohoi akuzat. Ai tha se nuk kishte favorizuar ask\u00ebnd dhe se kishet zbatuar vet\u00ebm ligjin.<\/p>\n<p>DSIK po ashtu n\u00eb raport paraqiti nj\u00eb s\u00ebr\u00eb vendimesh t\u00eb marra nga gjykat\u00ebsi i shkarkuar p\u00ebr njohje pron\u00ebsie n\u00eb Parkun Komb\u00ebtar t\u00eb Butrintit. N\u00eb raport rezulton se vendimet ishin marr\u00eb pa pranin\u00eb e zyrave q\u00eb mbronin interesin publik. \u00c7ela mohoi t\u00eb kishte dh\u00ebn\u00eb vendime p\u00ebr njohje pron\u00ebsie n\u00eb Parkun Komb\u00ebtar. Ai pretendoi se \u201cn\u00eb rast se toka do t\u00eb ishte brenda zon\u00ebs s\u00eb mbrojtur, institucionet shtet\u00ebrore duhet t\u00eb njoftonin gjykat\u00ebn n\u00eb rast se kishin prova p\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb pretendim\u201d. Por n\u00eb vendim thuhet se k\u00ebto gjyqe ishin zhvilluar pa pranin\u00eb e institucioneve shtet\u00ebrore t\u00eb paditura dhe pa pranin\u00eb e Avokatit t\u00eb Shtetit.<\/p>\n<p>Nj\u00eb tjet\u00ebr pik\u00eb n\u00eb t\u00eb cil\u00ebn KPK duket se ka bazuar vendimin p\u00ebr shkakrim jan\u00eb nj\u00eb s\u00ebr\u00eb vendimesh gjyq\u00ebsore me pal\u00eb nj\u00eb shqiptar q\u00eb jeton n\u00eb Kanada dhe motr\u00ebn e tij. Nj\u00eb denoncim pran\u00eb KPK kishte v\u00ebn\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb t\u00eb fundit n\u00eb dijeni p\u00ebr mund\u00ebsin\u00eb e konfliktit t\u00eb interesit.<\/p>\n<p>N\u00eb vendimin e zbardhur rezulton se gjyqtari ka mohuar njohjen paraprake mes tij dhe personit q\u00eb jeton n\u00eb Kanada, por sipas Komisionit u zbulua nj\u00eb komunik mes tyre n\u00eb rrjete sociale n\u00eb vitin 2012, q\u00eb provon se ata kishin njohje. Gjykat\u00ebsi dha nj\u00eb s\u00ebr\u00eb vendimesh n\u00eb favor t\u00eb k\u00ebtij personi dhe motr\u00ebs s\u00eb tij q\u00eb sipas KPK-s\u00eb ishin pas k\u00ebtij momenti t\u00eb provuar t\u00eb njohjes mes tyre.<\/p>\n<p>Nj\u00eb rast tjet\u00ebr konflikti interesi u zbulua sipas KPK p\u00ebr nj\u00eb pron\u00eb 30 metra katror\u00eb t\u00eb bler\u00eb nga nj\u00eb person i cili nj\u00eb vit para k\u00ebtij transaksioni kishte pasur \u00e7\u00ebshtje n\u00eb gjykat\u00eb q\u00eb ishte gjykuar nga \u00c7ela. Gjykat\u00ebsi pretendoi se vendimi q\u00eb kishte marr\u00eb nuk kishte lidhje me k\u00ebt\u00eb pron\u00eb dhe p\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb nuk kishte konflikt interesi. Ai tha se nuk kishte dh\u00ebn\u00eb vendim p\u00ebrfundimtar p\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb \u00e7\u00ebshtje, Por KPK u shpreh se vendimarrja dhe m\u00eb pas transaksioni c\u00ebnonin besimin e publikut te drejt\u00ebsia dhe etik\u00ebn e gjykat\u00ebsit.<\/p>\n<p>Po ashtu probleme rezultuan pas nj\u00eb denoncimi se pasurit\u00eb e vjehrrit t\u00eb gjyqtarit ishin pasuri t\u00eb k\u00ebtij t\u00eb fundit. KPK nuk mundi ta provonte k\u00ebt\u00eb lidhje, megjithat\u00eb n\u00eb vendim u ngrit\u00ebn dyshime p\u00ebr nj\u00eb apartament t\u00eb bler\u00eb n\u00eb Tiran\u00eb dhe nj\u00eb sip\u00ebrfaqe 30 metra n\u00eb Sarand\u00eb.<\/p>\n<p>P\u00ebr t\u00eb par\u00ebn KPK tha se dyshimit kishin t\u00eb b\u00ebnin me faktin se apartamenti ishte paguar nga t\u00eb dy pak\u00ebt, por ishte rregjistruar vet\u00ebm n\u00eb em\u00ebr t\u00eb subjektit. Nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb q\u00eb n\u00eb rastin e dyt\u00eb dyshimet u lidh\u00ebn me nj\u00eb adres\u00eb t\u00eb pun\u00ebs si avokat t\u00eb dh\u00ebnd\u00ebrit t\u00eb gjyqtarit.<\/p>\n<p>\u00c7ela i mohoi problemet. Ai i dha KPK-s\u00eb se dh\u00ebnd\u00ebri nuk kishte at\u00eb adres\u00eb t\u00eb zyr\u00ebs s\u00eb avokatis\u00eb, por nj\u00eb tjet\u00ebr. Komisioni e cil\u00ebsoi k\u00ebt\u00eb deklarim t\u00eb rrem\u00eb para tij, pasi sipas vendimit nj\u00eb verifikim i thjesht\u00eb n\u00eb Qendr\u00ebn Komb\u00ebtare t\u00eb Biznesit (QKB) zbuloi se adresa e zyr\u00ebs s\u00eb avokatis\u00eb ishte n\u00eb hap\u00ebsir\u00ebn 30 metra.<\/p>\n<p>N\u00eb fund KPK doli n\u00eb p\u00ebrfundimin se raporti i DSIK-s\u00eb ishte i v\u00ebrtet\u00eb dhe gjykat\u00ebsi Alltun \u00c7ela i pap\u00ebrshtatsh\u00ebm n\u00eb kriterin e figur\u00ebs. Komisioni vendosi se gjetja e \u00c7el\u00ebs n\u00eb disa raste t\u00eb konfliktit t\u00eb interesit e b\u00ebnte at\u00eb po ashtu t\u00eb papranuesh\u00ebm edhe n\u00eb kriterin profesional. Sipas komisionit n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb kriter u gjet\u00ebn edhe nj\u00eb mori problemesh t\u00eb tjera, p\u00ebrfshi keqmenaxhimin e m\u00ebnyr\u00ebs si publikoheshin online vendime. Sipas KPK-s\u00eb vet\u00ebm vendimet e gjyqtarit nuk kishin emrin e tij n\u00eb sistemin online, por ishin me inicialet A.\u00c7.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/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>Kryegjykat\u00ebsi i Sarand\u00ebs Alltun \u00c7ela u penalizua p\u00ebr shkak t\u00eb q\u00ebndrimeve t\u00eb ndryshme para Komisionit t\u00eb Pavarur t\u00eb Kualifikimit rreth pasurive. \u00c7ela u gjet nga KPK i pap\u00ebrshtatsh\u00ebm dhe i paaft\u00eb.<!-- 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":69603,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[13,5],"tags":[],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/www.reporter.al\/wp-content\/uploads\/seanca-alltun-cela-533x400.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/56012"}],"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=56012"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/56012\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":62272,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/56012\/revisions\/62272"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/69603"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=56012"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=56012"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=56012"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}