Drejtoria e Sigurimit t\u00eb Informacionit t\u00eb Klasifikuar ka l\u00ebshuar n\u00eb korrik 2020 nj\u00eb certifikat\u00eb sigurie t\u00eb kategoris\u00eb \u201cTep\u00ebr Sekret\u201d p\u00ebr prokurorin e Kruj\u00ebs, Petrit \u00c7ano me afat deri n\u00eb vitin 2025.<\/p>\n
Nj\u00eb vit m\u00eb von\u00eb, i nj\u00ebjti institucion i raportoi Kolegjit t\u00eb Posa\u00e7\u00ebm t\u00eb Apelimit se \u00c7ano nuk duhej t\u00eb ishte m\u00eb prokuror. Sipas DSIK-s\u00eb ai ishte \u201ci pap\u00ebrshtatsh\u00ebm\u201d p\u00ebr vazhdimin e detyr\u00ebs.<\/p>\n
Por kur Kolegji shqyrtoi raportin sekret, i cili bazoj n\u00eb informacionin e l\u00ebshuar nga nj\u00eb prej agjencive t\u00eb inteligjenc\u00ebs n\u00eb vend, rezultoi se ai bazohej mbi nj\u00eb parashikim.<\/p>\n
Si\u00e7 thuhet n\u00eb vendimin e zbardhur t\u00eb Kolegjit p\u00ebr \u00c7anon, raporti i DSIK-s\u00eb \u201chidhte dyshime mbi nj\u00eb veprimtari n\u00eb kund\u00ebrshtim me detyr\u00ebn e subjektit, e cila do t\u00eb finalizohej n\u00eb t\u00eb ardhmen\u201d.<\/p>\n
Madje sipas parashikimit paligjshm\u00ebria n\u00eb t\u00eb cil\u00ebn ishte p\u00ebrfshir\u00eb prokurori kusht\u00ebzohej edhe \u201cnga disa ngjarje q\u00eb nuk kishin ndodhur n\u00eb koh\u00ebn e marrjes s\u00eb informacionit\u201d.<\/p>\n
\u00c7ano u konfirmua nga Komisioni i Pavarur i Kualifikimit n\u00eb 19 korrik 2019, por vendimi u apelua nga Komisioneri Publik, Florian Ballhysa n\u00eb tetor t\u00eb atij viti.<\/p>\n
Prej prillit 2021 deri k\u00ebt\u00eb n\u00eb shtator t\u00eb vitit q\u00eb shkoi Kolegji zhvilloi nj\u00eb duzin\u00eb seancash, gjat\u00eb t\u00eb cilave ndaj tij u paraqit\u00ebn denoncime shtes\u00eb dhe raport i ri negativ nga DSIK.<\/p>\n
Por si\u00e7 del n\u00eb vendimin e zbardhur t\u00eb trup\u00ebs s\u00eb KPA-s\u00eb, kryesuar nga Albana Shtylla, me relatore Ina Ram\u00ebn dhe an\u00ebtar\u00eb Sokol \u00c7omon, Ardian Hajdarin dhe Rezarta Schuetz, denoncimet nuk q\u00ebndronin, nd\u00ebrsa raporti i klasifikuar nuk p\u00ebrmban informacion p\u00ebr kontakte t\u00eb pap\u00ebrshtatshme, por i referohet nj\u00eb ngjarje potenciale q\u00eb DSIk mendon se do t\u00eb ndodh\u00eb.<\/p>\n
Rr\u00ebzimi i DSIK-s\u00eb <\/strong><\/p>\n KPA dhe m\u00eb shpesh KPK kan\u00eb rr\u00ebzuar disa her\u00eb raportet e institucioneve ndihm\u00ebse \u2013 p\u00ebrfshir\u00eb t\u00eb DSIK-s\u00eb, por rasti i \u00c7anos duket \u2018sui generis\u2019, pasi si\u00e7 del nga vendimi i Kolegjit raporti p\u00ebr t\u00eb nuk p\u00ebrmban informacion p\u00ebr shkelje q\u00eb mund kan\u00eb ndodhur, por shkelje q\u00eb do t\u00eb ndodhnin.<\/p>\n Nga vendimi i Kolegjit lihet t\u00eb kuptohet se gjyqtar\u00ebt nuk kan\u00eb pasur as mund\u00ebsi p\u00ebr t\u00eb verifikuar p\u00ebrtej sa ishte raportuar.<\/p>\n \u201cKolegji mbeti pa l\u00ebnd\u00ebn q\u00eb do t\u00eb p\u00ebrb\u00ebnte objektin e verifikimit e vler\u00ebsimit t\u00eb sjelljes s\u00eb subjektit\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendim.<\/p>\n Trupa arsyeton se raporti negativ ishte marr\u00eb n\u00eb shkelje t\u00eb ligjit, pasi n\u00eb informacionin e dor\u00ebzuar nuk p\u00ebrmendej q\u00eb \u00c7ano t\u00eb kishte kontakte t\u00eb pap\u00ebrshtatshme me persona t\u00eb p\u00ebrfshir\u00eb n\u00eb krimin e organizuar, i cili \u00ebsht\u00eb edhe kriteri p\u00ebr t\u00eb shpallur pap\u00ebrshtatshm\u00ebri.\u00a0 N\u00eb vendim trupa arsyeton se raporti mund t\u00eb shqyrtohej vet\u00ebm n\u00eb kontekstin e profesionalizmit.<\/p>\n Por institucioni raportues nuk e kishte ndjekur m\u00eb tej informacionin e marr\u00eb n\u00eb rrug\u00eb sekrete. Kolegji shprehet n\u00eb vendim se informacioni u klasifikua si tep\u00ebr sekret dhe at\u00eb nuk mundi ta shihte as Komisioneri Publik, Florjan Ballhysa, i cili kishte ankimuar vendimin e Komisionit t\u00eb Pavarur t\u00eb Kualifikimit p\u00ebr konfirmimin e \u00c7anos.<\/p>\n Nga verifikimet e trup\u00ebs rezultoi se pas gjith\u00eb gurgules\u00eb informacioni ishte i pavler\u00eb p\u00ebr t\u00eb ndryshuar vler\u00ebsimin e \u00c7anos n\u00eb kriterin e figur\u00ebs.<\/p>\n Kolegji arsyeton n\u00eb vendim se pas verifikimit t\u00eb disa fakteve t\u00eb njohura prej KPA, atyre u rezultoi n\u00eb fakt se jo vet\u00ebm q\u00eb shkeljet e \u00c7anos nuk kishin ndodhur, por priteshin n\u00eb t\u00eb ardhmen, por edhe ngjarja q\u00eb duhej t\u00eb ndodhte n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb q\u00eb prokurori t\u00eb p\u00ebrfshihej apo t\u00eb kryente shkelje t\u00eb ligjit nuk mund t\u00eb ndodhte.<\/p>\n \u201cKolegji e analizoi k\u00ebt\u00eb rrethan\u00eb n\u00eb k\u00ebndv\u00ebshtrim t\u00eb disa fakteve t\u00eb njohura prej Kolegjit, n\u00eb kuptim t\u00eb nenit 49, pika 3 e ligjit nr. 84\/2016, t\u00eb cilat objektivisht pamund\u00ebsonin ndodhjen e ngjarjes me t\u00eb cil\u00ebn kusht\u00ebzohej veprimtaria e dyshuar e subjektit\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendim.<\/p>\n Kolegji shprehet se u gjend \u201cpara nj\u00eb situate faktike n\u00eb t\u00eb cil\u00ebn veprimi n\u00eb kund\u00ebrshtim me ligjin, i dyshuar se do t\u00eb kryhej prej subjektit, logjikisht dhe objektivisht nuk kishte ndodhur\u201d.<\/p>\n Rr\u00ebzimi i denoncimeve <\/strong><\/p>\n Pas ankimit nga Komisioneri Publik Florian Ballhysa n\u00eb Kolegjin e Posa\u00e7\u00ebm t\u00eb Apelimit t\u00eb \u00e7\u00ebshtjes ndaj prokurorit t\u00eb Kruj\u00ebs Petrit \u00c7ano, ndaj k\u00ebtij t\u00eb fundit u paraqit\u00ebn dy denoncime t\u00eb reja.<\/p>\n KPA u shpreh p\u00ebr denocimet q\u00eb n\u00eb seanc\u00ebn gjyq\u00ebsore. Nj\u00eb prej tyre kishte t\u00eb b\u00ebnte me \u00e7\u00ebshtje penale ngritur ndaj nd\u00ebrtuesve t\u00eb dy pallateve n\u00eb Kruj\u00eb. Sipas vendimit prokurori kishte nisur hetim ndaj tyre p\u00ebr shkak t\u00eb denoncimeve nga bler\u00ebs t\u00eb apartamenteve q\u00eb akuzonin se ishin mashtruar.<\/p>\n Personi n\u00eb fjal\u00eb pretendonte se hetimet n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb rast ishin hakmarr\u00ebse, por provat e sjella nga prokurori, verifikimet e trup\u00ebs dhe t\u00eb v\u00ebzhguesit nd\u00ebrkomb\u00ebtar treguan se n\u00eb fakt ishte denoncuesi ai q\u00eb po p\u00ebrpiqj t\u00eb hakmerrej ndaj prokurorit.<\/p>\n Kolegji shprehet n\u00eb vendim se n\u00eb fund \u201c\u00e7moi se informacioni i p\u00ebrcjell\u00eb n\u00ebp\u00ebrmjet tij\/tyre, nuk plot\u00ebsonte kriteret e besueshm\u00ebris\u00eb dhe objektivitetit, sipas parashikimit t\u00eb nenit 53 t\u00eb ligjit 84\/2016, p\u00ebr pasoj\u00eb vendosi t\u00eb mos e hetoj\u00eb at\u00eb\u201d.<\/p>\n Ngjash\u00ebm Kolegji vendosi edhe mbi nj\u00eb denoncim tjet\u00ebr. Sipas KPA informacioni i p\u00ebrcjell\u00eb me an\u00eb t\u00eb k\u00ebtij denoncimi, \u201cnuk u mb\u00ebshtet n\u00eb asnj\u00eb fakt q\u00eb buronte nga ndonj\u00eb dokument ligjor apo q\u00eb t\u00eb p\u00ebrftohej nga ndonj\u00eb burim prove i njohur nga ligji, p\u00ebr pasoj\u00eb ai nuk mund t\u00eb ndikoj\u00eb n\u00eb procesin e rivler\u00ebsimit p\u00ebr subjektin Petrit \u00c7ano\u201d.<\/p>\n Kolegji po ashtu rr\u00ebzoi edhe pretendimet e Komisionerit Publik sa i p\u00ebrket pasurive t\u00eb \u00c7anos. Kolegji nuk gjeti probleme as n\u00eb veprimet p\u00ebr blerjen e nj\u00eb apartamenti nga vet\u00eb prokurori, as n\u00eb ato n\u00eb blerjen e nj\u00eb apartamenti nga e bija dhe as n\u00eb shitjen e disa moblijve n\u00eb biznesin e vajz\u00ebs.<\/p>\n \u201cGjithashtu, ekzistojn\u00eb nj\u00eb s\u00ebr\u00eb rrethanash, p\u00ebrfshir\u00eb edhe munges\u00ebn e kushteve t\u00eb konfliktit t\u00eb interesit, t\u00eb cilat nuk mb\u00ebshtetin konkluzionin se \u00e7mimi i vendosur n\u00eb kontrat\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb fiktiv, prandaj pretendimi i Komisionerit Publik n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb drejtim, u vler\u00ebsua se nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb i mb\u00ebshtetur n\u00eb prova e n\u00eb ligj\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendim sa i p\u00ebrket pretendimeve p\u00ebr \u00e7mim fiktiv t\u00eb nj\u00eb apartamenti.<\/p>\n N\u00eb t\u00ebr\u00ebsi pas verifikimeve \u00c7ano rezultoi me nj\u00eb bilanc negativ prej 214 mij\u00eb lek\u00ebsh n\u00eb vitin 2005. KPA shpehet se ky ishte i vetmi fakt n\u00eb kriterin e pasuris\u00eb q\u00eb u provua ndaj prokurorit, por q\u00eb n\u00eb t\u00ebr\u00ebsi nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb konsideruar shkarkues.<\/p>\n Nj\u00ebsoj Kolegji vler\u00ebsoi edhe mbi kriterin e profesionalizmit. KPA shprehet se t\u00eb dh\u00ebnat statistikore mbi \u00e7\u00ebshtje p\u00ebr lirim me kusht e t\u00eb ngjashme nuk ishin t\u00eb mjaftueshme p\u00ebr t\u00eb vler\u00ebsuar profesionalisht subjektin, p\u00ebr sa koh\u00eb k\u00ebto nuk ishin \u00e7\u00ebshtje q\u00eb ai kishte ndjekur, por n\u00eb t\u00eb cilat ai vler\u00ebsohej si drejtues i prokuroris\u00eb.<\/p>\n \u201cGjykimi mbi cil\u00ebsin\u00eb e pun\u00ebs s\u00eb subjektit si drejtues mbi k\u00ebto shifra, do t\u00eb ishte i padrejt\u00eb dhe i pamb\u00ebshtetur as n\u00eb nj\u00eb panoram\u00eb t\u00eb plot\u00eb t\u00eb situat\u00ebs faktike dhe as n\u00eb dispozitat ligjore q\u00eb rregullojn\u00eb kompetencat e drejtuesit t\u00eb zyr\u00ebs\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendim.<\/p>\n N\u00eb fund KPA vendosi t\u00eb linte n\u00eb fuqi vendimin e Komisionit. \u201cN\u00eb p\u00ebrfundim t\u00eb shqyrtimit gjyq\u00ebsor, Kolegji \u00e7mon se k\u00ebrkimi p\u00ebrfundimtar i Komisionerit Publik, se nga vler\u00ebsimi i p\u00ebrgjithsh\u00ebm i t\u00eb tria kritereve t\u00eb procesit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit, rezulton q\u00eb subjekti i rivler\u00ebsimit ka cenuar besimin e publikut te sistemi i drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb, \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb konkluzion i pamb\u00ebshtetur n\u00eb situat\u00ebn faktike dhe parashikimet ligjore\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendim.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Drejtoria e Sigurimit t\u00eb Informacionit t\u00eb Klasifikuar ka l\u00ebshuar n\u00eb korrik 2020 nj\u00eb certifikat\u00eb sigurie t\u00eb kategoris\u00eb \u201cTep\u00ebr Sekret\u201d p\u00ebr prokurorin e Kruj\u00ebs, Petrit \u00c7ano me afat deri n\u00eb vitin 2025. Nj\u00eb vit m\u00eb von\u00eb, i nj\u00ebjti institucion i raportoi Kolegjit t\u00eb Posa\u00e7\u00ebm t\u00eb Apelimit se \u00c7ano nuk duhej t\u00eb ishte m\u00eb prokuror. Sipas DSIK-s\u00eb […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":97,"featured_media":71970,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[13,204,114,115],"tags":[424,112,425,149,236],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/www.reporter.al\/wp-content\/uploads\/Prokurori-Petrit-Cano.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"reu i Prokuroris\u00eb s\u00eb Kruj\u00ebs, Petrit \u00c7ano, duke dal\u00eb nga nj\u00eb seanc\u00eb e Kolegjit t\u00eb Posa\u00e7\u00ebm t\u00eb Apelimit | Foto : LSA","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/71969"}],"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=71969"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/71969\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":71971,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/71969\/revisions\/71971"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/71970"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=71969"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=71969"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=71969"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}