{"id":63364,"date":"2019-10-26T19:07:36","date_gmt":"2019-10-26T19:07:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.reporter.al\/vetingu\/?p=63364"},"modified":"2019-10-31T11:24:38","modified_gmt":"2019-10-31T11:24:38","slug":"bilancet-negative-financiare-sollen-shkarkimin-e-ilir-mustafajt","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/bilancet-negative-financiare-sollen-shkarkimin-e-ilir-mustafajt\/2019\/10\/26\/","title":{"rendered":"Bilancet negative financiare soll\u00ebn shkarkimin e Ilir Mustafajt"},"content":{"rendered":"

Vendimi i zbardhur i KPK tregon se gjyqtari Ilir Mustafaj u shkarkua pasi u gjet me munges\u00eb burimesh t\u00eb ligjshme t\u00eb pasuris\u00eb p\u00ebr 2.6 milion lek\u00eb dhe nj\u00eb s\u00ebr\u00eb mosdeklarimesh n\u00eb vite.<\/p>\n

\"\"
Gjyqtari Ilir Mustafaj, pas seanc\u00ebs n\u00eb KPK. Foto:Edmond Hoxhaj\/BIRN.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Trupa gjykuese e Komisionit t\u00eb Pavarur t\u00eb Kualifikimit ishte unanime n\u00eb vendimin p\u00ebr shkarkimin e gjyqtarit Ilir Mustafaj, deri n\u00eb at\u00eb moment kandidat p\u00ebr n\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebn Kushtetuese. KPK arriti n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb vendim duke arsyetuar se Mustafaj kishte b\u00ebr\u00eb deklarime t\u00eb pamjaftueshme dhe kishte munges\u00eb burimesh t\u00eb ligjshme n\u00eb vite prej 2.6 milion lek\u00eb.<\/p>\n

Trupa e KPK q\u00eb hetoi Mustafajn p\u00ebrb\u00ebhej nga Lulzim Hamitaj kryesues, Xhensila Pine relatore dhe Valbona Sanxhaktari, an\u00ebtare, e shkarkoi gjyqtarin p\u00ebr \u201cdeklarim t\u00eb pamjaftuesh\u00ebm t\u00eb pasuris\u00eb\u201d. N\u00eb vendim del se Mustafaj u gjet me nj\u00eb s\u00ebr\u00eb mosdeklarimesh dhe deklarimesh q\u00eb u konsideruan t\u00eb pamjaftueshme.<\/p>\n

Por n\u00eb vendimin e zbardhur del se dy nga an\u00ebtar\u00ebt e trup\u00ebs, Xhesila Pine dhe Lulzim Hamitaj, \u00a0dol\u00ebn me mendime paralele sa i p\u00ebrket 30 mij\u00eb eurove dhe thellimit t\u00eb hetimeve te personat e lidhur. T\u00eb dy q\u00ebndrimet kishin t\u00eb b\u00ebnin m\u00eb dh\u00ebnien prej familjes s\u00eb gjyqtarit t\u00eb nj\u00eb prone p\u00ebr nd\u00ebrtimin e nj\u00eb pallati te nj\u00eb kompani nd\u00ebrtimi dhe p\u00ebrfitimet prej saj.<\/p>\n

Ilir Mustafaj ka p\u00ebrfunduar fakultetin e Drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb n\u00eb vitin 1996 dhe ka punuar deri n\u00eb vitin 2000 si ndihm\u00ebsgjyqtar n\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebn e Tiran\u00ebs. Ai ushtronte funksionin e gjyqtarit n\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebn e Tiran\u00ebs prej vitit 2000, nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb q\u00eb ka qen\u00eb edhe an\u00ebtar K\u00ebshillit t\u00eb Lart\u00eb t\u00eb Drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb.<\/p>\n

Pretendimi p\u00ebr nj\u00ebanshm\u00ebri<\/strong><\/p>\n

Vendimi p\u00ebr shkarkimin e Mustafajt u mor m\u00eb 18 korrik 2019. N\u00eb vendimin e zbardhur s\u00ebfundmi vihet n\u00eb dukje se me rekomandim t\u00eb v\u00ebzhguesit nd\u00ebrkomb\u00ebtar Hans Kijlstra, trupa gjykuese argumentoi n\u00eb vendimin edhe mbi pretendimet e subjektit p\u00ebr nj\u00ebanshm\u00ebri t\u00eb relatores Pine.<\/p>\n

Nga vendimi del se Mustafaj k\u00ebrkoi p\u00ebrjashtimin e relatores Pine, duke e cil\u00ebsuar at\u00eb t\u00eb nj\u00ebanshme. NJ\u00eb trup\u00eb tjet\u00ebr gjykuese rr\u00ebzoi k\u00ebt\u00eb pretendim si t\u00eb pabazuar n\u00eb ligj. Por gjyqtari i shkarkuar nga KPK pretendoi se nj\u00eb e-mail i nisur nga Pine drejt trup\u00ebs q\u00eb gjykoi k\u00ebrkes\u00ebn p\u00ebr p\u00ebrjashtimin e saj, dokumentonte se vendimi ishte i paracaktuar.<\/p>\n

N\u00eb vendim citohet edhe paragrafi, i cili pretendohej si paragjykues: \u201cN\u00eb dit\u00ebn e seanc\u00ebs d\u00ebgjimore dokumentacioni ishte finalizuar s\u00eb studiuari nga trupa, por kjo nuk ka sjell\u00eb asnj\u00eb ndryshim n\u00eb rezultatet e hetimit, si\u00e7 pretendohet nga ana e subjektit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit\u201d.<\/p>\n

Por n\u00eb argumentim treshja q\u00eb gjykoi rastin e rr\u00ebzon k\u00ebt\u00eb pretendim, duke th\u00ebn\u00eb se edhe pse kjo p\u00ebrgjigje n\u00eb e-mail mund \u201ct\u00eb vler\u00ebsohej e pap\u00ebrshtatshme n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb dhe koh\u00eb\u201d ajo nuk p\u00ebrb\u00ebnte paragjykim. Sipas trup\u00ebs kjo sepse vendimi p\u00ebr t\u00eb p\u00ebrfunduar hetimin ishte marr\u00eb me unanimitet nga treshja q\u00eb gjykoi rastin, pra p\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb nuk mund t\u00eb faj\u00ebsohej relatorja dhe se nga ana tjet\u00ebr Mustafaj i kishte mund\u00ebsit\u00eb t\u00eb p\u00ebrmbyste k\u00ebt\u00eb q\u00ebndrim t\u00eb trup\u00ebs n\u00eb seanc\u00eb d\u00ebgjimore dhe n\u00ebse bindej kjo e fundit mund t\u00eb hapte hetimin edhe n\u00eb dy kriteret e tjera.<\/p>\n

Trupa gjykuese po ashtu v\u00eb n\u00eb dukje se vendimi \u201cvet\u00ebm mbi kriterin e vler\u00ebsimit t\u00eb pasuris\u00eb, nuk p\u00ebrb\u00ebn n\u00eb asnj\u00eb rast gj\u00eb t\u00eb gjykuar p\u00ebr kriterin e figur\u00ebs dhe at\u00eb t\u00eb vler\u00ebsimit profesional\u201d.<\/p>\n

Mendimet paralele<\/strong><\/p>\n

Xhensila Pine, relatorja e \u00e7\u00ebshtjes p\u00ebr t\u00eb cil\u00ebn Mustafaj kishte k\u00ebrkuar p\u00ebrjashtimin, ishte kund\u00ebr cil\u00ebsimit t\u00eb nj\u00eb shume prej 30 mij\u00eb euro, t\u00eb p\u00ebrfituar sipas Mustafajt nga dh\u00ebnia prej familjes s\u00eb tij e nj\u00eb toke p\u00ebr nd\u00ebrtim pallati, si t\u00eb ligjshme, duke e \u00e7uar bilancin negativ t\u00eb subjektit 6.1 milion lek\u00eb.<\/p>\n

Mustafaj n\u00eb fakt pretendoi se shuma ishte pjes\u00eb takuese e tij prej trash\u00ebgimis\u00eb s\u00eb n\u00ebn\u00ebs dhe se ai e p\u00ebrfitoi at\u00eb si parapagim nga kompania q\u00eb kishte marr\u00ebveshje me familjen e tij. Ai po ashtu pretendoi se tatimi p\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb shum\u00eb duhej t\u00eb ishte paguar nga kompania.<\/p>\n

Por Pine, duke u nisur nga deklarimet dhe q\u00ebndrimi i kompanis\u00eb, v\u00eb n\u00eb dukje n\u00eb arsyetimin e saj se ky pretendim nuk q\u00ebndronte dhe se n\u00eb rastin m\u00eb t\u00eb mir\u00eb shuma mund t\u00eb konsiderohej si dhurat\u00eb nga familja. Ajo arsyeton se pjesa takuese e gjyqtarit te trash\u00ebgimia e n\u00ebn\u00ebs ishte shum\u00eb m\u00eb e vog\u00ebl nga sa ai pretendonte dhe se kompania nga ana e saj nuk kishte pasur detyrim t\u00eb paguante tatime, p\u00ebrsa koh\u00eb ky ishte nj\u00eb dhurim i t\u00eb af\u00ebrmve tij (babait dhe v\u00ebllait te gjyqtari).<\/p>\n

Mos pagimi i tatimit e b\u00ebnte k\u00ebt\u00eb shum\u00eb sipas Pines t\u00eb paligjshme dhe kjo e \u00e7onte sipas saj bilancin negativ t\u00eb Mustafajt n\u00eb 6.1 milion lek\u00eb. Nga vendimi rezulton se shumica (n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb rast Hamitaj-Sanxhaktari) pranoi si t\u00eb ligjsh\u00ebm p\u00ebrfitmin e 30 mij\u00eb eurove, duke ia l\u00ebn\u00eb detyrimin p\u00ebr t\u00eb paguar tatimet kompanis\u00eb s\u00eb nd\u00ebrtimit.<\/p>\n

Shumica megjithat\u00eb n\u00eb vendim pranon se gjyqtari nuk kishte deklaruar shum\u00eb 30 mij\u00eb euro n\u00eb deklarat\u00ebn veting. \u201cKomisioni, gjithashtu, ka konstatuar se subjekti i rivler\u00ebsimit nuk e ka deklaruar shum\u00ebn prej 30.000 euro, n\u00eb rubrik\u00ebn e t\u00eb ardhurave t\u00eb p\u00ebrfituara, n\u00eb deklarat\u00ebn \u201cVetting\u201d, dhe kjo e b\u00ebn t\u00eb pamjaftueshme k\u00ebt\u00eb deklarat\u00eb, me pasojat e rastit, por ky mosdeklarim nuk mund ta b\u00ebj\u00eb jo ekzistuese k\u00ebt\u00eb shum\u00eb \u2212 realisht t\u00eb poseduar dhe t\u00eb p\u00ebrdorur nga subjekti\u201d, shprehet shumica.<\/p>\n

N\u00eb krahun tjet\u00ebr Lulzim Hamitaj kund\u00ebrshtoi zgjerimin e hetimit t\u00eb shumic\u00ebs n\u00eb kontrat\u00ebn e n\u00ebnshkruar prej t\u00eb af\u00ebrmve t\u00eb Mustafajt. Hetimi n\u00eb fjal\u00eb zbuloi se minimalisht personat e lidhur me gjyqtarin p\u00ebrfitonin 76 p\u00ebr qind t\u00eb pron\u00ebs s\u00eb dh\u00ebn\u00eb p\u00ebr nd\u00ebrtim \u201cndryshe nga pronar\u00ebt e tjer\u00eb t\u00eb tok\u00ebs\u201d, duke e konsideruar jo bind\u00ebs burimin e pasuris\u00eb s\u00eb tyre.<\/p>\n

Hamitaj arsyetoi se zgjerimi i hetimit ishte i panevojsh\u00ebm, pasi trupa arriti n\u00eb p\u00ebrfundimin q\u00eb 30 mij\u00eb eurot kishin burim t\u00eb ligjsh\u00ebm dhe burim i vullnetit t\u00eb lir\u00eb t\u00eb pal\u00ebve q\u00eb ishte shprehur n\u00eb kontrat\u00eb noteriale, pavar\u00ebsisht se mosdeklarimi i tyre n\u00eb deklarat\u00ebn veting penalizonte subjektin. Vet\u00eb Mustafaj pretendoi se ai nuk kishte pasur rol n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb marr\u00ebveshje.<\/p>\n

N\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb rast nj\u00eb shumic\u00eb e dyt\u00eb (Pine-Sanxhaktari) duke se ka vendosur n\u00eb favor t\u00eb zgjerimit t\u00eb hetimit te burimi i ligjsh\u00ebm i t\u00eb ardhurave t\u00eb personave t\u00eb lidhur, v\u00ebllai dhe babai i gjyqtarit.<\/p>\n

Kjo shumic\u00eb doli n\u00eb p\u00ebrfundimin se p\u00ebrfitimi i shum\u00ebs prej 30.000 euro duhej ta b\u00ebnte gjyqtarin t\u00eb kujdesh\u00ebm, nd\u00ebrsa i gjeti me probleme pasurin\u00eb e personave t\u00eb tjer\u00eb t\u00eb lidhur. \u201cTrupi gjykues arrin n\u00eb p\u00ebrfundimin se n\u00eb referenc\u00eb t\u00eb parashikimeve ligjore, n\u00eb provat q\u00eb disponon Komisioni, n\u00eb vler\u00ebsimin e \u00e7\u00ebshtjes n\u00eb t\u00ebr\u00ebsi, si dhe n\u00eb bindjen e brendshme, subjekti i rivler\u00ebsimit nuk ka arritur t\u00eb shpjegoj\u00eb bindsh\u00ebm burimin e ligjsh\u00ebm t\u00eb krijimit t\u00eb pasurive t\u00eb personave t\u00eb tjer\u00eb t\u00eb lidhur\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendim.<\/p>\n

Problemet e pasuris\u00eb<\/strong><\/p>\n

N\u00eb pjes\u00ebn tjet\u00ebr t\u00eb gjykimit KPK ishte unanime, nd\u00ebrsa gjeti se Mustafaj \u201cnuk ka pasur mund\u00ebsi p\u00ebr t\u00eb shlyer k\u00ebstet e kredive bankare, p\u00ebr t\u00eb p\u00ebrballuar shpenzimet jetike dhe\u00a0 shpenzime t\u00eb tjera dhe p\u00ebr t\u00eb kursyer likuiditete n\u00eb llogarit\u00eb bankare, duke rezultuar me nj\u00eb bilanc negativ\u201d n\u00eb total\u00a0 -2.6 milion lek\u00ebsh.<\/p>\n

Ngjash\u00ebm shumica arsyetoi se gjyqtari i shkarkuar nuk ka arritur \u201ct\u00eb shpjegoj\u00eb bindsh\u00ebm burimin e ligjsh\u00ebm t\u00eb krijimit t\u00eb pasuris\u00eb s\u00eb tij dhe t\u00eb personave t\u00eb lidhur\u201d.<\/p>\n

KPK gjeti nj\u00ebs\u00ebr\u00eb mosp\u00ebrputhjesh mes deklaratave periodike dhe asaj veting, nd\u00ebrsa vuri re disa mos deklarime t\u00eb ndryshimit t\u00eb pasuris\u00eb. Megjithat\u00eb ajo q\u00eb r\u00ebndoi situat\u00ebn e Mustafajt ishte analiza financiare, p\u00ebr tre vite (2009, 2011, 2013).<\/p>\n

\u201cBazuar n\u00eb analiz\u00ebn financiare t\u00eb kryer nga Komisioni deri n\u00eb dat\u00ebn 10.6.2011, dit\u00eb kur \u00ebsht\u00eb kryer veprimi financiar i depozitimit n\u00eb \u201cEmporiki Bank\u201d, subjekti ka pasur pamjaftueshm\u00ebri financiare p\u00ebr t\u00eb shlyer k\u00ebstet e kredive bankare, p\u00ebr t\u00eb p\u00ebrballuar shpenzimet minimale jetike dhe p\u00ebr t\u00eb kursyer likuiditete, dhe krijuar gjendje cash n\u00eb shum\u00ebn 10.300 euro, depozituar n\u00eb bank\u00eb n\u00eb dat\u00ebn 10.6.2011\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendim p\u00ebr sa i p\u00ebrket vitit 2011, n\u00eb t\u00eb cilin Mustafaj rezultoi me minus 1 milion lek\u00eb.<\/p>\n

N\u00eb vendimin e zbardhur del se KPK ka pranuar disa prej prap\u00ebsimeve t\u00eb Mustafajt duke e p\u00ebrmir\u00ebsuar me 400 mij\u00eb lek\u00eb bilancin p\u00ebr vitin 2011, por q\u00eb nuk ka ndryshuar rezultatin p\u00ebrfundimtar.<\/p>\n

N\u00eb p\u00ebrfundime t\u00eb ngjashme KPK doli edhe p\u00ebr vitin 2009 dhe 2013. Nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb nj\u00eb prej momenteve q\u00eb penalizoi Mustafajn \u00ebsht\u00eb ndryshimi i pron\u00ebsis\u00eb mbi nj\u00eb makin\u00eb q\u00eb ishte deklaruar fillimisht n\u00eb bashk\u00ebpron\u00ebsi me bashk\u00ebshorten, por q\u00eb m\u00eb pas iu shit k\u00ebsaj t\u00eb fundit nga subjekti me nj\u00eb \u00e7mim disa her\u00eb me t\u00eb shtrejt\u00eb se sa \u00e7mimi i blerjes. Shitja nuk u deklarua n\u00eb deklarat\u00ebn periodike dhe as n\u00eb at\u00eb veting.<\/p>\n

Mustafaj pretendoi p\u00ebr KPK se vlera e shitjes ishte vendosur pa kujdes dhe se veprimi ishte i till\u00eb q\u00eb nuk kishte ndryshuar asgj\u00eb brenda familjes dhe nuk kishte shtuar t\u00eb ardhurat e tij e p\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb nuk ishte deklaruar.<\/p>\n

Por trupi gjykues arriti n\u00eb p\u00ebrfundimin se transaksioni kishte krijuar likujditete p\u00ebr subjektin. \u201cTrupi gjykuese vler\u00ebson se n\u00ebp\u00ebrmjet k\u00ebtij transaksioni shitje automjeti nga subjekti te bashk\u00ebshortja n\u00eb t\u00eb kund\u00ebrt t\u00eb sa deklaron subjekti ishin krijuar likuiditete t\u00eb cilat duhet t\u00eb pasqyroheshin n\u00eb deklarat\u00ebn \u201cVetting\u201d dhe\u00a0 n\u00eb deklarimin e pasuris\u00eb t\u00eb vitit 2004\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendim.<\/p>\n

Sipas trup\u00ebs q\u00eb gjykoi rastin \u201csubjekti nuk\u00a0 arriti t\u00eb shpjegoj\u00eb se p\u00ebrse bashk\u00ebshortja bleu edhe pjes\u00ebn takuese t\u00eb saj ne k\u00ebt\u00eb automjet dhe p\u00ebr m\u00eb tep\u00ebr me nj\u00eb vler\u00eb disa here m\u00eb t\u00eb lart\u00eb, se vlera e blerjes, duke mos\u00a0 arritur t\u00eb shpjegoj\u00eb bindsh\u00ebm burimin e ligjsh\u00ebm t\u00eb krijimit t\u00eb k\u00ebsaj pasurie si pasuri e deklaruar n\u00eb deklarat\u00ebn \u201cVetting\u201d nga personi i lidhur bashk\u00ebshortja e tij\u201d.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Vendimi i zbardhur i KPK tregon se gjyqtari Ilir Mustafaj u shkarkua pasi u gjet me munges\u00eb burimesh t\u00eb ligjshme t\u00eb pasuris\u00eb p\u00ebr 2.6 milion lek\u00eb dhe nj\u00eb s\u00ebr\u00eb mosdeklarimesh n\u00eb vite.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":97,"featured_media":63368,"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\/7c6670da-f3dc-4ea6-8f4d-ac77ab185863-533x400.jpeg","fifu_image_alt":"Bilancet negative financiare soll\u00ebn shkarkimin e Ilir Mustafajt","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/63364"}],"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=63364"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/63364\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":63384,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/63364\/revisions\/63384"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/63368"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=63364"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=63364"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=63364"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}