Gjykata e Posa\u00e7me p\u00ebr Korrupsionin dhe Krimin e Organizuar, njoftoi t\u00eb premten m\u00eb 16 shtator vendimin p\u00ebr shpalljen t\u00eb pafajshme t\u00eb an\u00ebtares s\u00eb Komisionit t\u00eb Pavarur t\u00eb Kualifikimit, Etleda \u00c7iftja, e cila u akuzua nga SPAK p\u00ebr veprat penale \u201cfalsifikimi i dokumenteve\u2019 dhe \u201crefuzimi p\u00ebr deklarimin, mosdeklarimi, fshehja ose deklarimi i rrem\u00eb i pasurive, interesave privat\u00eb t\u00eb personave t\u00eb zgjedhur dhe n\u00ebpun\u00ebsve publik\u00eb\u201d.<\/p>\n
Vendimi i pafaj\u00ebsis\u00eb p\u00ebr Etleda \u00c7iftjan u dha nga gjyqtari Erjon Bani. N\u00eb vendimin e arsyetuar q\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs e Posa\u00e7me shp\u00ebrndau p\u00ebr mediet, gjyqtari Bani sqqaron fillimisht n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb t\u00eb detajuar se ka k\u00ebrkuar dor\u00ebheqjen p\u00ebr shkak se komisionerja Etleda \u00c7iftja ka qen\u00eb nj\u00eb prej an\u00ebtareve t\u00eb trup\u00ebs s\u00eb Komisionit t\u00eb Pavarur t\u00eb Kualifikimit q\u00eb kreu procesin e rivler\u00ebsimit ndaj tij, q\u00eb m\u00eb dat\u00eb 24 maj 2021 e konfirmoi n\u00eb detyr\u00eb.<\/p>\n
Bani sqaron se n\u00eb k\u00ebrkes\u00ebn p\u00ebr heqje dor\u00eb nga gjykimi drejtuar kryetares n\u00eb detyr\u00eb t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Posa\u00e7me, ka parashtruar faktin se \u00c7iftja ka qen\u00eb an\u00ebtare e trup\u00ebs s\u00eb KPK q\u00eb e rivler\u00ebsoi, por nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb ka theksuar se marrdh\u00ebniet me t\u00eb pandehur\u00ebn kan\u00eb qen\u00eb dhe jan\u00eb \u2018indiferente\u2019. Ai ka v\u00ebrejtur se mund t\u00eb vihet n\u00eb dyshim \u201cpaan\u00ebsia n\u00eb dukje\u201d.<\/p>\n
Kryetarja e gjykat\u00ebs ka \u00e7muar se kjo situat\u00eb nuk p\u00ebrligj dhe nuk p\u00ebrb\u00ebn shkak p\u00ebr heqjen dor\u00eb t\u00eb gjyqtarit nga gjykimi i k\u00ebrkes\u00ebs penale, si dhe nuk p\u00ebrb\u00ebn penges\u00eb ligjore p\u00ebr gjykimin me objektivitet dhe paan\u00ebsi t\u00eb k\u00ebsaj k\u00ebrkese nga gjyqtari. Ajo ka v\u00ebrejtur se procesi i vetingut p\u00ebr gjyqtarin Bani \u00ebsht\u00eb p\u00ebrfunduar me vendim t\u00eb form\u00ebs s\u00eb prer\u00eb dhe se nuk ka konflikt interesi.<\/p>\n
Erjon Bani ishte caktuar si gjyqtar i seanc\u00ebs paraprake, por pas k\u00ebrkes\u00ebs s\u00eb \u00c7iftjas p\u00ebr gjykim t\u00eb shkurtuar dhe pranimit t\u00eb k\u00ebsaj k\u00ebrkese, u kalua n\u00eb gjykimin e drejt\u00ebp\u00ebrdrejt\u00eb, ku gjyqtari paraprak mori atributin e atij t\u00eb themelit.<\/p>\n
N\u00eb vendimin e arsyetuar sqarohen rrethanat e fakteve q\u00eb kan\u00eb sjell\u00eb situatat p\u00ebr t\u00eb cilat SPAK ka ngritur akuz\u00eb ndaj \u00c7iftjas. N\u00eb vitin 2006 \u00c7iftja ka dashur t\u00eb blej\u00eb nj\u00eb apartament n\u00eb Tiran\u00eb n\u00eb vler\u00ebn rreth 42 mij\u00eb USD dhe p\u00ebr shkak t\u00eb pamund\u00ebsis\u00eb financiare i \u00ebsht\u00eb drejtuar nj\u00eb banke p\u00ebr kredi, q\u00eb ka k\u00ebrkuar vendosjen e nj\u00eb pasurie t\u00eb paluajtshme si kolateral. P\u00ebr shkak se apartamenti q\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb dakord\u00ebsuar t\u00eb blej\u00eb nuk ishte i regjistruar, nuk mund t\u00eb vendosej si kolateral dhe n\u00eb k\u00ebto kushte \u00ebsht\u00eb k\u00ebrkuar nj\u00eb pasuri si garanci.<\/p>\n
Sipas deklarimeve t\u00eb \u00c7iftjas e t\u00eb d\u00ebshmitar\u00ebve t\u00eb tjer\u00eb n\u00eb hetimin penal, banka ku do merrej kredia ka sygjeruar q\u00eb t\u00eb paraqeste nj\u00eb kontrat\u00eb blerje t\u00eb nj\u00eb prone tjet\u00ebr q\u00eb plot\u00ebsonte kushtet e p\u00ebrcaktuara lidhur me vler\u00ebn.<\/p>\n
N\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb periudh\u00eb, babai i \u00c7iftjas ka filluar procedurat p\u00ebr regjistrimin e dy pronave n\u00eb Kavaj\u00eb q\u00eb plot\u00ebsonin kushtet p\u00ebr kolateral sipas k\u00ebrkesave t\u00eb bank\u00ebs, konkretisht dy parcela toke q\u00eb i ka p\u00ebrfituar sipas ligjit \u201cP\u00ebr Tok\u00ebn\u201d, n\u00eb vitin 1995. Pronat pasi jan\u00eb regjistruar vler\u00ebsoheshin sipas trugut t\u00eb lir\u00eb n\u00eb shum\u00ebn 48 mij\u00eb euro.<\/p>\n
\u00c7iftja dhe d\u00ebshmitar\u00ebt kan\u00eb shpjeguar se sipas rekomandimeve t\u00eb bank\u00ebs, \u00ebsht\u00eb kryer akt shitblerje mes saj dhe babait p\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb tok\u00eb, n\u00eb shum\u00ebn 300 mij\u00eb lek\u00eb. Por nisur nga fakti se banka e k\u00ebrkonte n\u00eb vler\u00eb m\u00eb t\u00eb madhe \u00ebsht\u00eb sh\u00ebnuar n\u00eb vijim shuma 50 mij\u00eb euro. Nga hetimi ka rezultuar se n\u00eb ZVRPP Kavaj\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb regjistruar kontrata e shitjes me \u00e7mim 300 mij\u00eb lek\u00eb. E pandehura e ka cil\u00ebsuar si nj\u00eb ngat\u00ebrres\u00eb e paq\u00ebllimt\u00eb n\u00eb faqosjen e kontrat\u00ebs dhe dokumentat bashkalidhur, por q\u00eb nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb kryer prej saj.<\/p>\n
Nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb, \u00ebsht\u00eb sqaruar se n\u00eb fakt, akti i shitjes ishte nj\u00eb form\u00eb dhurimi e kryer nga babai me q\u00ebllim p\u00ebrfitimin e kredis\u00eb dhe se nuk i kishte shlyer familjes prind\u00ebrore ndonj\u00eb vler\u00eb.<\/p>\n
Bazuar n\u00eb k\u00ebto fakte, prokuroria ka ngritur akuz\u00ebn e \u201cfalsifikimit t\u00eb dokumenteve\u201d, por gjykata \u00e7mon ndryshe. Sipas gjyqtarit Bani, falsifikim do t\u00eb kishte n\u00ebse dokumenti nuk do t\u00eb rridhte nga pal\u00ebt q\u00eb e kan\u00eb nd\u00ebnshkruar at\u00eb me dakord\u00ebsi. \u201c[\u2026]Pasi q\u00ebllimi i v\u00ebrtet\u00eb i pal\u00ebve n\u00eb lidhjen e k\u00ebtyre kontratave ka qen\u00eb t\u00eb mbuloj\u00eb veprimin juridik t\u00eb dhurimit, i cili p\u00ebrmbush t\u00eb gjitha kushtet e nevojshme p\u00ebr vlefshm\u00ebrin\u00eb e tij, me q\u00ebllim sigurimin e nj\u00eb kredie bankare nga e pandehura Etleda \u00c7iftja p\u00ebr t\u00eb financuar apartamentin e vet\u00ebm q\u00eb ajo ka n\u00eb pron\u00ebsi\u201d, arsyetoi Bani gjat\u00eb shpalljes s\u00eb vendimit t\u00eb p\u00ebrmbledhur.<\/p>\n
Gjykata \u00e7mon se, n\u00eb kuadrin e \u00e7\u00ebshtjeve civile b\u00ebjn\u00eb pjes\u00eb dhe padit\u00eb p\u00ebr pavlefshm\u00ebrin\u00eb e veprimeve juridike, ku p\u00ebrfshihen dhe veprimet juridike \u201cfiktive ose t\u00eb simuluara\u201d. P\u00ebr rrjedhoj\u00eb konkludon se k\u00ebto \u04ab\u00ebshtje nuk b\u00ebjn\u00eb pjes\u00eb n\u00eb juridiksionin penal.<\/p>\n
Sipas gjykat\u00ebs, prokuroria duhej t\u00eb kishte proceduar me mosfillim t\u00eb procedimit lidhur me akuz\u00ebn e \u201cfalsifikimit t\u00eb dokumenteve\u201d dhe n\u00ebse procedimi do t\u00eb kishin filluar, duhej t\u00eb k\u00ebrkonte n\u00eb gjykat\u00eb pushimin e \u00e7\u00ebshtjes.<\/p>\n
Bani ka kryer n\u00eb vijim analiz\u00eb t\u00eb mund\u00ebsis\u00eb s\u00eb konsumimit te veprave penale n\u00ebp\u00ebrmjet k\u00ebtyre veprimeve fiktive. Sipas tij, megjith\u00ebse veprimet juridike fiktive ose t\u00eb simuluara nuk i plot\u00ebsojn\u00eb element\u00ebt e vepr\u00ebs penale t\u00eb \u201cfalsifikimit t\u00eb dokumenteve\u201d, p\u00ebrpilimi dhe p\u00ebrdorimi i tyre n\u00eb praktik\u00eb mund t\u00eb passjell\u00eb p\u00ebrgjegj\u00ebsi penale p\u00ebr vepra t\u00eb tjera penale, n\u00ebse b\u00ebhen me q\u00ebllim mospagimin e taksave n\u00eb vler\u00ebn e parashikuar nga kuadri ligjor n\u00eb fuqi, duke konsumuar vepr\u00ebn penale \u201cfshehja e t\u00eb ardhurave\u201d.<\/p>\n
Por, duke ju referuar legjslacionit t\u00eb koh\u00ebs lidhur me \u201cfshehjen e t\u00eb ardhurave\u201d, Bani v\u00ebren se q\u00eb t\u00eb konsumohej kjo vep\u00ebr penale, duhej q\u00eb m\u00eb par\u00eb t\u00eb ishte marr\u00eb mas\u00eb administrative.<\/p>\n
N\u00eb vendim thuhet se n\u00eb rastin konkret nuk rezulton q\u00eb t\u00eb jet\u00eb marr\u00eb ndonj\u00eb mas\u00eb e till\u00eb ndaj familjar\u00ebve t\u00eb t\u00eb pandehur\u00ebs \u00c7iftja, pasi kjo e fundit n\u00eb kontratat e shitjes nuk paraqitet n\u00eb pozicionin e shit\u00ebsit q\u00eb t\u00eb mund t\u00eb p\u00ebrfitonte t\u00eb ardhura. Gjykata konstaton se n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb rast nuk rezulton t\u00eb jet\u00eb marr\u00eb asnj\u00eb mas\u00eb administrative dhe p\u00ebr rrjedhoj\u00eb i bashkohet q\u00ebndrimit t\u00eb prokuroris\u00eb, se kjo vep\u00ebr penale nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb konsumuar.<\/p>\n
Po ashtu, nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb konstatuar t\u00eb ket\u00eb element\u00eb t\u00eb vepr\u00ebs penale \u201cmashtrim me kredi\u201d, pasi vlera e kredis\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb shlyer e gjitha prej \u00c7iftjas.<\/p>\n
Lidhur me akuz\u00ebn e dyt\u00eb, at\u00eb t\u00eb deklarimit t\u00eb rrem\u00eb t\u00eb pasuris\u00eb, Bani arsyeton se kjo ndodh n\u00eb rastet kur funksionari pasqyron n\u00eb deklarat\u00eb m\u00eb tep\u00ebr pasuri se sa ka, n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb q\u00eb me von\u00eb t\u00eb mund t\u00eb justifikoj\u00eb shtimin e pasuris\u00eb nga ndonj\u00eb veprim i mundsh\u00ebm korruptiv dhe jo t\u00eb l\u00ebr\u00eb pa deklaruar pasuri q\u00eb jan\u00eb p\u00ebrfituar n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb t\u00eb ligjshme.<\/p>\n
\u201c[\u2026]Do t\u00eb ishim p\u00ebrpara deklarimit t\u00eb rrem\u00eb t\u00eb pasuris\u00eb, t\u00eb pasqyruar n\u00eb deklarat\u00ebn e pasuris\u00eb n\u00ebse subjekti i deklarimit pasqyron si fakt fitimin e nj\u00eb pasurie n\u00ebp\u00ebrmjet dhurimit, nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb q\u00eb provohet q\u00eb ky akt \u00ebsht\u00eb fiktiv, pasi realisht subjekti e ka bler\u00eb nga burime t\u00eb paligjshme, si dhe rastet kur subjekti i deklarimit deklaron blerjen e nj\u00eb pasurie n\u00eb nj\u00eb vler\u00eb m\u00eb t\u00eb vog\u00ebl se vlera reale e bler\u00eb apo shitjen e nj\u00eb pasurie me nj\u00eb vler\u00eb m\u00eb t\u00eb lart\u00eb se vlera reale e shitur\u201d, argumenton gjykata dhe thekson se t\u00eb gjitha deklarimet e rreme duhet t\u00eb b\u00ebhen nga subjekti i deklarimit me q\u00ebllim futjen e pasurive t\u00eb v\u00ebna n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb t\u00eb paligjshme n\u00eb sistemin e rregullt fiskal dhe pasqyrimin n\u00eb formular\u00ebt e deklarimit t\u00eb interesave privat, duke p\u00ebrdorur forma t\u00eb ndryshme justifikimi.<\/p>\n
Sipas Banit, rasti n\u00eb gjykim nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb i till\u00eb, pasi rezulton q\u00eb toka t\u00eb jet\u00eb p\u00ebrfituar n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb t\u00eb ligjshme nga familja e \u00c7iftjas, si edhe apartamenti i bler\u00eb prej saj. Ai shton se deklarimi i pasakt\u00eb dhe i paplot\u00eb i kryer n\u00eb deklarat\u00ebn para fillimit t\u00eb detyr\u00ebs nga \u00c7iftja, \u00ebsht\u00eb korrigjuar kur ajo \u00ebsht\u00eb thirrur dhe pyetur n\u00eb ILDKPKI.<\/p>\n
\u201cPra, nuk konsiderohet deklarimi i rrem\u00eb i pasurive kur kemi t\u00eb b\u00ebjm\u00eb me gabime materiale, parregullsi ku futen dhe mosplot\u00ebsimi i t\u00eb gjitha rubrikave t\u00eb deklarat\u00ebs, duke l\u00ebn\u00eb pasuri t\u00eb ligjshme t\u00eb padeklaruara apo plot\u00ebsime t\u00eb gabuara t\u00eb deklarat\u00ebs s\u00eb pasuris\u00eb, p\u00ebr t\u00eb cilat subjekti i deklarimit thirret nga ILDKPKI-ja p\u00ebr t\u2019i ndrequr ato\u201d, shprehet Bani.<\/p>\n
Megjith\u00ebse n\u00eb deklarat\u00ebn e par\u00eb \u00c7iftja ka deklaruar si burim t\u00eb pasurive t\u00eb blera pagat, p\u00ebr sip\u00ebrfaqet tok\u00eb ar\u00eb, konkludohet se burim \u00ebsht\u00eb dhurimi nga familjar\u00ebt, nd\u00ebrsa p\u00ebr apartamentin kredia e marr\u00eb n\u00ebp\u00ebrmjet aktit fiktiv t\u00eb shitblerjes s\u00eb tokave.<\/p>\n
Gjykata v\u00ebren se gjat\u00eb hetimit \u00ebsht\u00eb provuar v\u00ebrtet\u00ebsia e shpjegimeve t\u00eb dh\u00ebna nga \u00c7iftja n\u00eb ILDKPKI lidhur me burimet reale t\u00eb pasurive dhe p\u00ebr rrjedhoj\u00eb, prokuroria do t\u00eb ishte n\u00eb kushtet p\u00ebr t\u00eb ngritur akuz\u00eb ndaj t\u00eb pandehur\u00ebs, vet\u00ebm n\u00ebse do t\u00eb provohej e kund\u00ebrta e asaj q\u00eb kishte deklaruar. N<\/strong>\u00eb vendim thuhet se ligji nuk njeh p\u00ebrpilim t\u00eb nj\u00eb deklarate t\u00eb re, por ajo konsiderohet e korrigjuar me shpjegimet q\u00eb japin subjektet deklarues n\u00eb procesverbalin e mbajtur nga Inspektor\u00ebt e ILDKPKI-s\u00eb.<\/p>\n P\u00ebr zgjidhjen e \u00e7\u00ebshtjes, gjykata th\u00ebrret n\u00eb ndihm\u00eb edhe jurispudenc\u00ebn e Kolegjit t\u00eb Posa\u00e7\u00ebm t\u00eb Apelimit, sipas t\u00eb cilit, \u201cpasakt\u00ebsit\u00eb n\u00eb deklarimin e pasuris\u00eb t\u00eb pa shoq\u00ebruara me munges\u00eb t\u00eb burimeve t\u00eb krijimit t\u00eb pasurive, n\u00eb procesin e rivler\u00ebsimit kalimtar t\u00eb gjyqtar\u00ebve dhe prokuror\u00ebve nuk passjellin as p\u00ebrgjegj\u00ebsi disiplinore\u201d. \u201c[…]P\u00ebr rrjedhoj\u00eb nuk ka sens logjik e juridik t\u00eb sjell\u00eb p\u00ebrgjegj\u00ebsi penale\u201d, shprehet Bani.<\/p>\n N\u00eb p\u00ebrfundim, ai \u00e7mon se fakti objekt gjykimi nuk p\u00ebrb\u00ebn vep\u00ebr penale, por kund\u00ebrvajtje administrative.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Gjykata e Posa\u00e7me p\u00ebr Korrupsionin dhe Krimin e Organizuar, njoftoi t\u00eb premten m\u00eb 16 shtator vendimin p\u00ebr shpalljen t\u00eb pafajshme t\u00eb an\u00ebtares s\u00eb Komisionit t\u00eb Pavarur t\u00eb Kualifikimit, Etleda \u00c7iftja, e cila u akuzua nga SPAK p\u00ebr veprat penale \u201cfalsifikimi i dokumenteve\u2019 dhe \u201crefuzimi p\u00ebr deklarimin, mosdeklarimi, fshehja ose deklarimi i rrem\u00eb i pasurive, interesave […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":637,"featured_media":70978,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[204],"tags":[288,162,118],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/www.reporter.al\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/PHOTO-2022-09-16-14-04-19.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"Komisionerja Etleda \u00c7iftja pas seanc\u00ebs n\u00eb KPA | Foto: LSA","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/70977"}],"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\/637"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=70977"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/70977\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":70979,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/70977\/revisions\/70979"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/70978"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=70977"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=70977"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=70977"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}