{"id":72566,"date":"2021-10-19T11:27:24","date_gmt":"2021-10-19T09:27:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/kpk-e-gjeti-gjyqtarin-ken-dhima-me-minus-60-5-milione-leke-dhe-dy-pasuri-te-fshehura\/2021\/10\/19\/"},"modified":"2023-04-06T18:30:47","modified_gmt":"2023-04-06T16:30:47","slug":"kpk-e-gjeti-gjyqtarin-ken-dhima-me-minus-60-5-milione-leke-dhe-dy-pasuri-te-fshehura","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/kpk-e-gjeti-gjyqtarin-ken-dhima-me-minus-60-5-milione-leke-dhe-dy-pasuri-te-fshehura\/2021\/10\/19\/","title":{"rendered":"KPK e gjeti gjyqtarin Ken Dhima me minus 60.5 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb dhe dy pasuri t\u00eb fshehura"},"content":{"rendered":"

Analizat financiare nga Komisioni i Pavarur i Kualifikimit e gjet\u00ebn gjyqtarin e Gjykat\u00ebs Administrative n\u00eb Vlor\u00eb Ken Dhima me bilanc negativ n\u00eb 12 vite, dy pasuri t\u00eb fshehura dhe dy raste t\u00eb dhuratave nga persona t\u00eb cil\u00ebt ai i kishte gjykuar ose i gjykoi n\u00eb vijim.\u00a0 Dhima refuzoi sipas KPK t\u00eb shpjegonte barr\u00ebn e prov\u00ebs.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
KPK duke shpallur nj\u00eb vendim | Foto : LSA<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Gjyqtari i Gjykat\u00ebs Administrative t\u00eb Vlor\u00ebs Ken Dhima refuzoi t\u00eb jepte shpjegime p\u00ebr nj\u00eb s\u00ebr\u00eb \u00e7\u00ebshtjesh p\u00ebr t\u00eb cilat iu kalua barr\u00eb prove nga Komisioni i Pavarur i Kualifikimit. N\u00eb vendimin e zbardhur KPK thot\u00eb se Dhima paraqiti si pretendime munges\u00ebn e koh\u00ebs, humbjen e kontakteve me personat e ndrysh\u00ebm ose thjesht\u00eb nuk ktheu p\u00ebrgjigje pyetjeve t\u00eb b\u00ebra nga Komisionit.<\/p>\n

Trupa e kryesuar nga Brunilda Bekteshi, Pamela Qirko relatore dhe Suela Zhegu an\u00ebtare vendosi shkarkimin e Dhim\u00ebs m\u00eb 29 korrik, pas nj\u00eb seance d\u00ebgjimore n\u00eb t\u00eb cil\u00ebn gjyqtari nuk mori pjes\u00eb. N\u00eb vendim KPK v\u00eb n\u00eb dukje se Dhima kishte dor\u00ebzuar nj\u00eb raport mjek\u00ebsor\u00eb m\u00ebngjesin e dat\u00ebs s\u00eb seanc\u00ebs.\u00a0 Por Komisioni pasi vler\u00ebsoi se ai kishte pasur mund\u00ebsi t\u00eb caktonte p\u00ebrfaq\u00ebsues ligjore dhe mosbashk\u00ebpunimin e tij n\u00eb t\u00ebr\u00ebsi me procesin, vendosi ta vijonte at\u00eb pa pranin\u00eb e Dhim\u00ebs.<\/p>\n

Gjyqtari n\u00eb fund t\u00eb procesit u shkarkua p\u00ebr munges\u00eb t\u00eb burimeve financiare t\u00eb ligjshme p\u00ebr t\u00eb justifikuar pasurit\u00eb, fshehje t\u00eb pasuris\u00eb, deklarim t\u00eb rrem\u00eb dhe konflikt interesi.<\/p>\n

Dhima e ka filluar karrier\u00ebn n\u00eb vitin 2003 n\u00eb Gjykat\u00eb e Rrethit Gjyq\u00ebsor Durr\u00ebs. N\u00eb vitin 2004 ai \u00ebsht\u00eb transferuar n\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebn e Rrethit Gjyq\u00ebsor Shkod\u00ebr. N\u00eb vitin 2013, Dhima \u00ebsht\u00eb em\u00ebruar n\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebn Administrative Vlor\u00eb.<\/p>\n

N\u00eb vitin 2014, s\u00ebbashku me bashk\u00ebshorten Klorinda \u00c7ela \u2013 gjithashtu me profesion gjyqtare, Dhima u kall\u00ebzua nga Inspektorati i Lart\u00eb p\u00ebr Kontrollin dhe Deklarimin e Pasuris\u00eb dhe Konfliktit t\u00eb Interesit, ILDKPKI, p\u00ebr fshehje pasurie.<\/p>\n

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

Nj\u00eb proces p\u00ebr shkarkimin e Dhim\u00ebs n\u00eb ish-K\u00ebshillin e Lart\u00eb t\u00eb Drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb n\u00eb vitin 2014 d\u00ebshtoi, pavar\u00ebsisht problemeve q\u00eb ILDKPKI kishte gjetur n\u00eb pasurit\u00eb e gjyqtarit. Por i p\u00ebrballur thuajse me t\u00eb nj\u00ebjtat pyetje n\u00eb Komisionin e Pavarur t\u00eb Kualifikimit Dhima duket se zgjodhi t\u00eb mos i p\u00ebrfillte problemet e ngritura nga Komsioni.<\/p>\n

I pyetur p\u00ebr t\u00eb ardhurat e huadh\u00ebn\u00ebsve dhe dhuruesve jo t\u00eb pakt\u00eb Dhima d\u00ebrgoi p\u00ebrgjigje p\u00ebrgjith\u00ebsuese, ose pretendoi se koha ishte e pak\u00ebt apo nuk iu p\u00ebrgjigj fare pyetjeve t\u00eb Komisionit p\u00ebr nj\u00eb list\u00eb t\u00eb gjat\u00eb personash.<\/p>\n

KPK v\u00eb n\u00eb dukje n\u00eb vendim se nga analiza financiare p\u00ebr t\u00eb gjitha vitet e marra n\u00eb shqyrtim Dhima rezultoi me bilanc negativ prej 60.5 milion\u00eb lek\u00ebsh. N\u00eb dy raste sipas Komisionit u provua se ai kishte tentuar t\u00eb fshihte pasuri.<\/p>\n

Nj\u00eb apartament n\u00eb em\u00ebr t\u00eb v\u00ebllait n\u00eb Sh\u00ebngjin dhe nj\u00eb nj\u00ebsi tregtare 124 metra n\u00eb Tiran\u00eb n\u00eb em\u00ebr t\u00eb kunatit.<\/p>\n

N\u00eb rastin e par\u00eb Dhima ka pretenduar se kishte firmosur kontrat\u00ebn p\u00ebr v\u00ebllain pasi ai nuk ndodhej n\u00eb Shqip\u00ebri, por KPK ka gjetur se v\u00ebllai i gjyqtarit kishte qen\u00eb n\u00eb Shqip\u00ebri sipas sistemit TIMS edhe disa muaj pas kontrat\u00ebs dhe se kishte depozituar edhe para n\u00eb llogarin\u00eb e bashk\u00ebshortes s\u00eb Dhim\u00ebs.<\/p>\n

Komisioni tha se p\u00ebr apartamentin kishte nj\u00eb kontrat\u00eb uj\u00ebsjell\u00ebsi n\u00eb em\u00ebr t\u00eb Dhim\u00ebs dhe se ky i fundit nuk kishte shpjeguar transaksionet q\u00eb e lidhin me k\u00ebt\u00eb apartament.<\/p>\n

Rasti i dyt\u00eb q\u00eb p\u00ebrfshin dy kontrata, nj\u00eb kredi dhe nj\u00eb s\u00ebr\u00eb veprimesh t\u00eb nd\u00ebrmarra nga Dhima dhe Bashk\u00ebshortja po ashtu u vler\u00ebsua si pasuri e fshehur. \u201cKomisioni ngre dyshime t\u00eb arsyeshme se kjo pasuri de facto \u00ebsht\u00eb porositur dhe paguar nga subjekti i rivler\u00ebsimit dhe personi i lidhur p\u00ebr p\u00ebrdorim, disponimin dhe g\u00ebzim t\u00eb plot\u00eb prej tyre, por se kontrata e porosis\u00eb de jure \u00ebsht\u00eb lidhur n\u00eb em\u00ebr t\u00eb z. A.\u00c7, n\u00eb p\u00ebrpjekje p\u00ebr fshehjen e k\u00ebsaj pasurie\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendim.<\/p>\n

KPK vuri n\u00eb dukje se n\u00eb nj\u00eb hetim nga ILDKPKI p\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb pasuri kunati i subjektit, v\u00ebllai i bashk\u00ebshortes, kishte refuzuar t\u00eb deklaronte, nd\u00ebrsa nj\u00eb num\u00ebr personash t\u00eb tret\u00eb kishin paguar k\u00ebstet e kredis\u00eb p\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb pasuri. Konkretisht sipas Komisionit tre persona\u00a0 t\u00eb identifikuar si B.S, F.E dhe H.B kishin derdhur k\u00ebste kredi p\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb pasuri n\u00eb shum\u00ebn 1.1 milion lek\u00eb. V\u00ebllai i Dhim\u00ebs kishte paguar 128 mij\u00eb lek\u00eb dhe kunati i tij nj\u00eb shum\u00eb prej 10.9 milion\u00eb lek\u00ebsh.<\/p>\n

Dhima sipas Komisionit nuk dha dokumente dhe as shpjegime p\u00ebr burimin e ligjsh\u00ebm t\u00eb pasuris\u00eb s\u00eb k\u00ebtyre financuesve. \u201cKen Dhima nuk ka qen\u00eb gjithmon\u00eb bashk\u00ebpunues gjat\u00eb procesit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit, n\u00eb p\u00ebrputhje me nenin 48 t\u00eb ligjit nr. 84\/2016, duke mos iu p\u00ebrgjigjur drejtp\u00ebrdrejt t\u00eb gjitha pyetjeve t\u00eb d\u00ebrguara gjat\u00eb hetimit administrativ, si edhe duke mos depozituar dokumentacionin e k\u00ebrkuar nga Komisioni, si gjat\u00eb hetimit administrativ, ashtu edhe me d\u00ebrgimin e rezultateve t\u00eb hetimit\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendimin e zbardhur.<\/p>\n

Probleme t\u00eb ngjashme KPK gjeti p\u00ebr huat\u00eb e marra nga Dhima. Sipas Komisionit gjyqtari pretendonte se kishte marr\u00eb nj\u00eb hua nga nj\u00eb person n\u00eb shum\u00ebn 2 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb n\u00eb vitin 2004 dhe nuk e kishte shlyer k\u00ebt\u00eb hua as n\u00eb vitin 2016. Dhima pretendoi se nuk i merrte dot shpjegime p\u00ebr pasurin\u00eb huadh\u00ebn\u00ebsit, pasi marr\u00ebdh\u00ebniet e tyre ishin prishur p\u00ebr shkak t\u00eb moskthimit t\u00eb huas\u00eb.<\/p>\n

Por n\u00eb deklarim noterial huadh\u00ebn\u00ebsi thot\u00eb se nuk e kishte k\u00ebrkuar pjes\u00ebn e huas\u00eb p\u00ebr shkak t\u00eb marr\u00ebdh\u00ebnieve miq\u00ebsore, nd\u00ebrsa nga hetimi rezultoi se t\u00eb nj\u00ebjtit person gjyqtari i kishte marr\u00eb si pages\u00eb qiraje 2.9 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb deri n\u00eb vitin 2016.<\/p>\n

Komisioni tha se k\u00ebto veprime ishin par\u00eb si t\u00eb \u2018palogjikshme\u201d, nd\u00ebrsa i pyetur p\u00ebr mos shlyerjen e huas\u00eb edhe pse nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb huadh\u00ebn\u00ebsi i paguante qira Dhima pretendoi se \u201ckishte pasur shpenzime m\u00eb t\u00eb r\u00ebnd\u00ebsishme\u201d.<\/p>\n

Nj\u00ebsoj me probleme KPK gjeti nj\u00eb marr\u00ebdh\u00ebnie me vjehrrin, p\u00ebr t\u00eb cilin Dhima refuzoi t\u00eb vendoste n\u00eb dispozicion informacion justifikues p\u00ebr shkak t\u00eb munges\u00ebs s\u00eb koh\u00ebs.<\/p>\n

Nj\u00eb s\u00ebr\u00eb pasurish\u00eb q\u00eb n\u00eb kontrat\u00eb u vler\u00ebsun 246 mij\u00eb euro, por q\u00eb Dhima pretendoi se i kishte bler\u00eb p\u00ebr 105 mij\u00eb, u gjet\u00ebn me probleme nga Komisioni. Nga hetimi rezultoi se p\u00ebrkund\u00ebr pretendimeve t\u00eb gjyqtarit, veprimet me bank\u00ebn dhe ato noteriale ishin kontradiktore, nd\u00ebrsa pretendimet e Dhim\u00ebs se i kishte marr\u00eb pasurit\u00eb karabina u rr\u00ebzuan nga fotot e kompanis\u00eb q\u00eb i tregonin ato t\u00eb p\u00ebrfunduara.<\/p>\n

Konflikt interesi<\/strong><\/p>\n

KPK tha se nga hetimi rezultuan dy raste t\u00eb mundshme t\u00eb konfliktit t\u00eb interesit. I pari mbi nj\u00eb makin\u00eb 650 mij\u00eb lek\u00eb q\u00eb Dhima kishte marr\u00eb dhurat\u00eb n\u00eb Shkod\u00ebr n\u00eb vitin 2011. Makina ishte marr\u00eb nga nj\u00eb person me inicialet R.H, t\u00eb cilin ai e kishte gjykuar p\u00ebr vepr\u00ebn penale t\u00eb \u201cShkeljes s\u00eb rregullave t\u00eb qarkullimit rrugor\u201d n\u00eb mars t\u00eb vitit 2008.<\/p>\n

Dhima vet\u00eb ka pranuar se kishte miq\u00ebsi me dhuruesin, por ka th\u00ebn\u00eb se n\u00eb dijeni t\u00eb tij nuk kishte pasur as \u00e7\u00ebshtje me t\u00eb dhe as dijeni q\u00eb ai t\u00eb kishte precedent\u00eb penal\u00eb. Gjyqtari refuzoi t\u00eb informonte KPK mbi mund\u00ebsit\u00eb financiare t\u00eb dhuruesit.<\/p>\n

\u201cN\u00eb vler\u00ebsim t\u00eb rrethanave dhe fakteve t\u00eb m\u00ebsip\u00ebrme, trupi gjykues \u00e7mon se kjo dhurat\u00eb i \u00ebsht\u00eb b\u00ebr\u00eb subjektit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit p\u00ebr shkak t\u00eb pozicionit t\u00eb tij\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendim.<\/p>\n

Nj\u00eb situat\u00eb e ngjashme u verifikua edhe p\u00ebr dy makina me vler\u00eb 45 mij\u00eb euro. Makinat rezultonin t\u00eb blera nga nj\u00eb person me inicialet A.D, p\u00ebr t\u00eb cilat Dhima kishte kontrat\u00eb p\u00ebrdorimi pa kund\u00ebrshp\u00ebrblim.<\/p>\n

Komisioni verifikoi se Dhima nuk i kishte deklaruar dy makinat n\u00eb deklarat\u00ebn veting dhe se po ashtu nuk kishte deklaruar burimin e ligjsh\u00ebm t\u00eb personit q\u00eb ai kishte v\u00ebn\u00eb ato n\u00eb dispozicion. Nga hetimi nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb rezultoi A.D dhe kompania e k\u00ebtij t\u00eb fundit pat\u00ebn \u00e7\u00ebshtje gjyq\u00ebsore me Dhim\u00ebn n\u00eb koh\u00ebn q\u00eb ky p\u00ebrdorte makinat e v\u00ebna n\u00eb dispozicion prej A.D dhe kompanis\u00eb s\u00eb tij.<\/p>\n

\u201cN\u00eb vijim t\u00eb hetimeve, pas k\u00ebrkes\u00ebs s\u00eb b\u00ebr\u00eb nga Komisioni, Gjykata Administrative e Shkall\u00ebs s\u00eb Par\u00eb Vlor\u00eb informon se gjat\u00eb vitit 2016, subjekti i rivler\u00ebsimit z. Ken Dhima, ka gjykuar \u00e7\u00ebshtjen pal\u00eb padit\u00ebse shoq\u00ebria \u201c***\u201d sh.p.k., me p\u00ebrfaq\u00ebsues ligjor z. A.D, me pal\u00eb t\u00eb paditur ISSH Tiran\u00eb\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendim.<\/p>\n

Komisioni shprehet n\u00eb vendim se pas vler\u00ebsimit n\u00eb t\u00ebr\u00ebsi t\u00eb \u00e7\u00ebshtjes arriti n\u00eb p\u00ebrfundimin se Dhima nuk arrin nivel t\u00eb besuesh\u00ebm n\u00eb vler\u00ebsimin e pasuris\u00eb, kishte c\u00ebnuar besimin e publikut te sistemi i drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb dhe se nuk qe bashk\u00ebpunues gjat\u00eb procesit t\u00eb hetimit.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Analizat financiare nga Komisioni i Pavarur i Kualifikimit e gjet\u00ebn gjyqtarin e Gjykat\u00ebs Administrative n\u00eb Vlor\u00eb Ken Dhima me bilanc negativ n\u00eb 12 vite, dy pasuri t\u00eb fshehura dhe dy raste t\u00eb dhuratave nga persona t\u00eb cil\u00ebt ai i kishte gjykuar ose i gjykoi n\u00eb vijim.\u00a0 Dhima refuzoi sipas KPK t\u00eb shpjegonte barr\u00ebn e prov\u00ebs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":97,"featured_media":72567,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[13,117,362],"tags":[231,107,509,118],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/www.reporter.al\/wp-content\/uploads\/Komisioni-i-Pavarur-i-Kualifikimit-.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"KPK duke shpallur nj\u00eb vendim | Foto : LSA","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/72566"}],"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=72566"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/72566\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":72568,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/72566\/revisions\/72568"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/72567"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=72566"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=72566"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=72566"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}