{"id":73452,"date":"2021-05-18T12:05:20","date_gmt":"2021-05-18T10:05:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/kpa-rrezoi-si-te-parendesishme-arsyetimet-qe-rikthenin-ne-sistem-ish-gjytare-te-gjykates-se-larte\/2021\/05\/18\/"},"modified":"2023-04-06T21:38:42","modified_gmt":"2023-04-06T19:38:42","slug":"kpa-rrezoi-si-te-parendesishme-arsyetimet-qe-rikthenin-ne-sistem-ish-gjytare-te-gjykates-se-larte","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/kpa-rrezoi-si-te-parendesishme-arsyetimet-qe-rikthenin-ne-sistem-ish-gjytare-te-gjykates-se-larte\/2021\/05\/18\/","title":{"rendered":"KPA rr\u00ebzoi si t\u00eb par\u00ebnd\u00ebsishme arsyetimet q\u00eb rikthenin n\u00eb sistem ish-gjytaren e Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Lart\u00eb"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Nj\u00eb shumic\u00eb n\u00eb KPA rr\u00ebzoi pretendimet e ish-gjyqtares s\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Lart\u00eb, Evelina Qirjako se nuk kishte dh\u00ebn\u00eb dor\u00ebheqjen, nd\u00ebrsa la n\u00eb fuqi penalizimin me 15 vjet ndalim p\u00ebr nj\u00eb vend n\u00eb sistemin e drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb. N\u00eb pakic\u00eb dy gjyqtar\u00eb arsyetuan se KPA duhej t\u00eb zbatonte nj\u00eb vendim t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs Administrative t\u00eb Apelit dhe t\u00eb priste rezultatin e rekursit n\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebn e Lart\u00eb.<!--more--><\/p>\n<figure id=\"attachment_74609\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-74609\" style=\"width: 536px\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reporter.al\/wp-content\/uploads\/Arjana-Fullani-dhe-Evelina-Qirjako-duke-dal\u00eb-nga-seanca-n\u00eb-KPA.jpg\"><img decoding=\"async\" loading=\"lazy\" class=\"size-large wp-image-74609\" src=\"https:\/\/www.reporter.al\/wp-content\/uploads\/Arjana-Fullani-dhe-Evelina-Qirjako-duke-dal\u00eb-nga-seanca-n\u00eb-KPA-536x400.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"536\" height=\"400\" data-id=\"74609\" \/><\/a><figcaption id=\"caption-attachment-74609\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Arjana Fullani dhe Evelina Qirjako duke dal\u00eb nga seanca n\u00eb KPA | Foto : E. Hoxhaj<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p>N\u00eb vendimin p\u00ebr ankimimin e ish-gjyqtares s\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Lart\u00eb Evelina Qirjako kund\u00ebr kufizimit 15-vje\u00e7ar\u00eb p\u00ebr rikthim n\u00eb detyr\u00eb vendosur nga KPK shumica n\u00eb Kolegjin e Posa\u00e7\u00ebm t\u00eb Apelimit, arsyetoi se koha e mbarimit t\u00eb mandatit ishte e par\u00ebnd\u00ebsishme n\u00eb procesin e rivler\u00ebsimit. Shumica arsyetoi se Qirjako duhej t\u2019i n\u00ebnshtrohej procesit p\u00ebr sa koh\u00eb kishte qen\u00eb n\u00eb detyr\u00eb pas hyrjes n\u00eb fuqi t\u00eb ligjit dhe refuzimi p\u00ebr tu rivler\u00ebsuar duhej t\u00eb penalizohej me ndalimin 15-vje\u00e7ar\u00eb.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cAsgj\u00eb n\u00eb frym\u00ebn apo gjuh\u00ebn e normave kushtetuese e ligjore nuk mb\u00ebshtet k\u00ebt\u00eb k\u00ebndv\u00ebshtrim selektiv t\u00eb parashtruar nga subjekti, p\u00ebrkundrazi\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendimin e shumic\u00ebs s\u00eb KPA t\u00eb p\u00ebrb\u00ebr\u00eb nga Natasha Mulaj, Rezarta Schuetz dhe Ardian Hajdari.<\/p>\n<p>N\u00eb pakic\u00eb Sokol \u00c7omo dhe Albana Shtylla k\u00ebmb\u00ebngul\u00ebn se Kolegji duhej t\u00eb kishte zbatuar nj\u00eb vendim t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs Administrative t\u00eb Apelit i cili kishte rr\u00ebzuar nj\u00eb vendim t\u00eb K\u00ebshillit t\u00eb Lart\u00eb Gjyq\u00ebsor\u00eb mbi dor\u00ebheqjen e Qirjakos dhe ish-gjyqtares Arjana Fullani.<\/p>\n<p>Pakica thot\u00eb se vendimi i Administratives ishte i detyruesh\u00ebm p\u00ebr KPA dhe se kjo e fundit duhej s\u00ebpaku t\u00eb kishte pezulluar procesin deri n\u00eb vendimin e Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Lart\u00eb p\u00ebr rastin.<\/p>\n<p><strong>P\u00ebrpjekja p\u00ebr rikthim nga \u201cdritarja\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>N\u00eb korrik 2017, Qirjako dhe 4 an\u00ebtar\u00eb t\u00eb tjer\u00eb t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Lart\u00eb njoftuan largimin nga detyra pas p\u00ebrfundimit t\u00eb mandatit t\u00eb tyre. N\u00eb vijim ish-an\u00ebtar\u00ebt e Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Lart\u00eb, Arjana Fullani, Guxim Zenelaj, Andi \u00c7eliku, Aleksand\u00ebr Muskaj dhe Evelina Qirjako refuzuan t\u2019i n\u00ebnshtrohen procesit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit me pretendimin se nuk e kishin m\u00eb statusin e magjistratit. Ata po ashtu refuzuan pozicionet n\u00eb Apel q\u00eb iu ofruan nga K\u00ebshilli i Lart\u00eb Gjyq\u00ebsor, me pretendimin se do t\u00eb punon si avokat\u00eb.<\/p>\n<p>Bazuar mbi k\u00ebt\u00eb refuzim KPK vendosi se secili prej tyre kishte b\u00ebr\u00eb dor\u00ebheqje dhe bazuar n\u00eb ligjin p\u00ebr rivler\u00ebsimin caktoi mas\u00ebn ndalues prej 15 vjet\u00ebsh p\u00ebr rikthim n\u00eb sistem. Por nd\u00ebrsa u duk se dor\u00ebheqjet kishin qen\u00eb p\u00ebrfundimtare, Fullani, Muskaj dhe Qirjako e apeluan vendimin e KPK-s\u00eb. Kjo u duk si nj\u00eb p\u00ebrpjekje p\u00ebr tu dh\u00ebn\u00eb atyre mund\u00ebsin\u00eb t\u00eb riktheheshin n\u00eb sistem pa iu n\u00ebnshtruar procesit si koleg\u00ebt e tyre q\u00eb q\u00ebndruan n\u00eb detyr\u00eb.<\/p>\n<p>P\u00ebr shkak t\u00eb procedur\u00ebs s\u00eb ndjekur nga Komisioni p\u00ebr dor\u00ebheqjet deri n\u00eb at\u00eb moment me vendimmarrje pa d\u00ebgjuar subjektet, ata bind\u00ebn Kolegjin p\u00ebr parregullsi n\u00eb proces. T\u00eb tre rastet iu n\u00ebnshtruan pas k\u00ebsaj shqyrtimit n\u00eb seanc\u00eb publike n\u00eb KPA. Muskaj u rr\u00ebzua n\u00eb nj\u00eb vendim unanim p\u00ebr shkak se ai nuk e kishte apeluar vendimin e KLGJ q\u00eb e konsideronte dor\u00ebheqje refuzimin e vendit n\u00eb apel. Nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb \u00e7\u00ebshtja u komplikua n\u00eb rastet e Qirjakos dhe Fullanit, pasi t\u00eb dyja kishin ankimuar vendimin n\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebn Administrative t\u00eb Apelit.<\/p>\n<p>N\u00eb rastin Fullani, KPA refuzoi t\u00eb pezullonte procesin deri n\u00eb vendimin e Gjykat\u00ebs Administrative t\u00eb Apelit dhe me shumic\u00eb 3 me dy la n\u00eb fuqi vendimin e shkarkimit. N\u00eb rastin e Qirkos procesi shkoi deri pas vendimit nga Gjykata Administrative e Apelit q\u00eb i dha asaj t\u00eb drejt\u00eb n\u00eb padin\u00eb ndaj KLGJ-s\u00eb. Megjithat\u00eb shumica arsyetoi nj\u00ebsoj se ky vendim nuk prekte procesin e rivler\u00ebsimit, i cili kryhet vet\u00ebm prej KPK dhe KPA.<\/p>\n<p>Nj\u00eb form\u00eb e ngjashme apelimi u ndoq edhe prej nj\u00eb s\u00ebr\u00eb gjyqtar\u00ebsh dhe prokuror\u00ebsh q\u00eb pretenduan me an\u00eb t\u00eb procedur\u00ebs dalje n\u00eb pension apo probleme t\u00eb tjera, n\u00eb nj\u00eb p\u00ebrpjekje q\u00eb do i \u201cshp\u00ebtonte\u201d nga rivler\u00ebsimi dhe nj\u00ebkoh\u00ebsisht mbante hapur nj\u00eb der\u00eb p\u00ebr t\u00eb qen\u00eb pjes\u00eb t\u00eb sistemit t\u00eb drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Q\u00ebndrimi i shumic\u00ebs<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Kolegji pranoi k\u00ebrkesat e Qirjakos p\u00ebr t\u00eb kaluar procesin n\u00eb seanc\u00eb publike. KPA po ashtu pranoi k\u00ebrkes\u00ebn p\u00ebr t\u00eb marr\u00eb si prov\u00eb vendimin e Gjykat\u00ebs Administrative t\u00eb Apelit. Vendimi i jepte t\u00eb drejt\u00eb ish-gjyqtares dhe cil\u00ebsonte t\u00eb gabuar vendimin e KLGJ-s\u00eb se ajo kishte dh\u00ebn\u00eb dor\u00ebheqjen nga statusi i magjistratit. Gjykata Administrative e Apelit arsyetonte se Qirjakos i kishte mbaruar mandati e p\u00ebr pasoj\u00eb nuk e kishte pasur m\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb status n\u00eb fund t\u00eb korrikut 2017.<\/p>\n<p>Por shumica n\u00eb KPA arsyeton se ky vendim dhe pretendimet e lidhura me t\u00eb nuk ishin \u201crelevante\u201d n\u00eb procesin e rivler\u00ebsimit.\u00a0 \u201cP\u00ebr rrjedhoj\u00eb, pretendimet e subjektit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit, znj. Evelina Qirjako, q\u00eb lidhen me koh\u00ebzgjatjen e ushtrimit t\u00eb detyr\u00ebs si an\u00ebtare e Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Lart\u00eb apo me koh\u00ebzgjatjen e statusit t\u00eb magjistrates, konsiderohen jorelevante p\u00ebr sa i p\u00ebrket procesit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit kalimtar\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb arsyetimin e shumic\u00ebs.<\/p>\n<p>Shumica arsyeton se Qirjako ishte pjes\u00eb e Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Lart\u00eb kur u miratuan ndryshimet kushtetuese dhe se ajo si koleg\u00ebt e saj duhej t\u2019i n\u00ebnshtroheshin procesit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit me prioritet.<\/p>\n<p>Sipas shumic\u00ebs vet\u00ebm vonesat n\u00eb ngritjen e institucioneve t\u00eb vetingut mund\u00ebsuan situat\u00ebn e krijuar, pasi n\u00eb t\u00eb kund\u00ebrt Qirjako do ishte nj\u00eb nd\u00ebr subjektet e para q\u00eb i n\u00ebnshtrohej procesit. \u00a0\u201cKy fakt q\u00ebndron, \u00ebsht\u00eb i pakontestuesh\u00ebm dhe autonom nga momenti kur statusi i magjistratit deklarohet i mbaruar nga institucionet p\u00ebrkat\u00ebse\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb arsyetimin e shumic\u00ebs.<\/p>\n<p>Shumica thot\u00eb se n\u00ebse merrej p\u00ebr baz\u00eb pretendimi i subjektit \u201cbazuar mbi argumentin kohor t\u00eb dor\u00ebzimit t\u00eb detyr\u00ebs\u201d, procesi i rivler\u00ebsimit do t\u00eb ishte selektiv dhe secili magjistrat do kishte mund\u00ebsi t\u2019i shmangej atij me \u201cmbarim t\u00eb mandatit\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>KPA shprehet se ky arsyetim \u201cnuk \u00ebsht\u00eb i bazuar dhe as logjikisht i pranuesh\u00ebm\u201d.\u00a0 Duke iu referuar rasteve t\u00eb Muskajt dhe Fullanit trupa n\u00eb shumic\u00eb shprehet se rasti ishte i ngjash\u00ebm dhe se vendimi nuk mund t\u00eb ishte i ndrysh\u00ebm.\u00a0 \u201cN\u00eb t\u00eb dyja rastet e shqyrtuara m\u00eb par\u00eb, trupat gjykuese t\u00eb Kolegjit kan\u00eb konkluduar pakontestueshm\u00ebrin\u00eb e faktit q\u00eb gjyqtar\u00ebt e Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Lart\u00eb, n\u00eb momentin e hyrjes n\u00eb fuqi t\u00eb ndryshimeve kushtetuese e ligjore q\u00eb soll\u00ebn rivler\u00ebsimin, ishin subjekte rivler\u00ebsimi ex-officio\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendim.<\/p>\n<p>Shumica po ashtu arsyeton se masa e ndalimit prej 15 vjet\u00ebsh nuk c\u00ebnonte t\u00eb drejta t\u00eb tjera t\u00eb subjektit dhe se ishte nj\u00eb mas\u00eb ndalimi propocionale q\u00eb bazohej n\u00eb vendime t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs Europiane t\u00eb t\u00eb Drejtave t\u00eb Njeriut.<\/p>\n<p>Shumica e cil\u00ebson q\u00ebndrimin e Qirjakos p\u00ebr t\u00eb mos iu n\u00ebnshtruar rivler\u00ebsimit si shprehej t\u00eb vullnetit t\u00eb pavesuar p\u00ebr dor\u00ebheqje dhe se pasoj\u00eb e k\u00ebsaj ishte automatikisht ndalimi p\u00ebr t\u00eb qen\u00eb pjes\u00eb e sistemit p\u00ebr 15 vjet.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Q\u00ebndrimi i pakic\u00ebs<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>P\u00ebrndryshe nga shumica gjyqtar\u00ebt \u00c7omo dhe Shtylla arsyetuan se KPA nuk kishte m\u00eb juridiksjon mbi \u00e7\u00ebshtjen.<\/p>\n<p>Gjyqtar\u00ebt n\u00eb pakic\u00eb e anashkalojn\u00eb arsyetimin e shumic\u00ebs n\u00eb lidhje me rivler\u00ebsimin dhe\u00a0 shprehen se Kolegji duhej t\u00eb zbatonte vendimin e Gjykat\u00ebs Administrative t\u00eb Apelit.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cP\u00ebr ne, gjyqtar\u00ebt n\u00eb pakic\u00eb, Kolegji nuk ka juridiksion t\u00eb vler\u00ebsoj\u00eb n\u00eb rastin konkret \u00e7\u00ebshtjen lidhur me mbarimin e statusit t\u00eb subjektit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit, znj. Evelina Qirjako\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb q\u00ebndrimin e pakic\u00ebs.<\/p>\n<p>Pakica i m\u00ebshon argumenteve t\u00eb b\u00ebra edhe nga Qirjako se ajo me humbjen e statusit nuk i n\u00ebnshtrohej m\u00eb procesit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit. Sipas pakic\u00ebs kjo e detyronte KPA t\u2019i referohej q\u00ebndrimit t\u00eb KLGJ-s\u00eb mbi statusin dhe vendimit gjyq\u00ebsor\u00eb t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs Administrative t\u00eb Apelit, q\u00eb kishte kontrollin gjyq\u00ebsor\u00eb mbi vendimet e KLGJ-s\u00eb.<\/p>\n<p>Sipas pakic\u00ebs p\u00ebr shkak t\u00eb k\u00ebtij procesi t\u00eb pavarur prej vendimmarrjes s\u00eb KPA as ndalimi 15-vje\u00e7ar\u00eb nuk mund t\u00eb aplikohej.\u00a0 \u201cN\u00eb kushtet kur sipas vendimit nr. 6, dat\u00eb 21.01.2021, t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs Administrative t\u00eb Apelit, rezultoi se mbarimi i statusit t\u00eb magjistrates p\u00ebr subjektin e rivler\u00ebsimit, znj. Evelina Qirjako, nuk ka ardhur p\u00ebr \u201cshkak t\u00eb heqjes dor\u00eb nga e drejta e caktimit n\u00eb nj\u00eb pozicion n\u00eb nivel gjykate apeli\u201d, sikurse konkludoi K\u00ebshilli i Lart\u00eb Gjyq\u00ebsor n\u00eb vendimin e tij nr. 66, dat\u00eb 24.04.2019, ne gjyqtar\u00ebt n\u00eb pakic\u00eb vler\u00ebsojm\u00eb se nuk ndodhemi n\u00eb kushtet e dor\u00ebheqjes nga detyra\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb mendimin e pakic\u00ebs.<\/p>\n<p>Aty arsyetohet se n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb rast \u201cnuk duhet t\u00eb aplikohet ndalimi i parashikuar nga neni G\u201d\u00a0 i Kushtetut\u00ebs, q\u00eb p\u00ebrkon me ndalimin e ushtrimit t\u00eb ndonj\u00eb funksioni n\u00eb sistemin e drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb p\u00ebr 15 vjet.<\/p>\n<p>P\u00ebrndryshe nga shumica pakica pretendon se procesi paralel i nisur nga Qirjako dhe Fullani n\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebn Administrative t\u00eb Apelit, ishte n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb rast p\u00ebrtej kompetencave t\u00eb KPA, q\u00eb sh\u00ebrben si dhom\u00eb e Gjykat\u00ebs Kushtetuese, dhe procesit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit.<\/p>\n<p>Pakica madje shprehet se kishte k\u00ebrkuar pezullim t\u00eb vendimit t\u00eb KPA deri n\u00eb nj\u00eb vendim t\u00eb mundsh\u00ebm nga Gjykata e Lart\u00eb n\u00ebse atje b\u00ebhej rekurs. \u00a0\u201cVendimi i Gjykat\u00ebs Administrative t\u00eb Apelit mund t\u00eb kontrollohet n\u00eb rast kund\u00ebrshtimi nga pal\u00ebt vet\u00ebm nga Gjykata e Lart\u00eb, po p\u00ebr asnj\u00eb arsye Kolegji nuk mund t\u00eb mos njoh\u00eb dhe zbatoj\u00eb vendimin e gjykat\u00ebs kompetente\u201d, shpehet pakica.<\/p>\n<p>Gjyqtar\u00ebt n\u00eb pakic\u00eb thon\u00eb se ata do t\u00eb ndryshonin q\u00ebndrim n\u00ebse Gjykata e Lart\u00eb do t\u00eb rr\u00ebzonte k\u00ebt\u00eb vendim t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs Administrative t\u00eb Apelit.<\/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>Nj\u00eb shumic\u00eb n\u00eb KPA rr\u00ebzoi pretendimet e ish-gjyqtares s\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Lart\u00eb, Evelina Qirjako se nuk kishte dh\u00ebn\u00eb dor\u00ebheqjen, nd\u00ebrsa la n\u00eb fuqi penalizimin me 15 vjet ndalim p\u00ebr nj\u00eb vend n\u00eb sistemin e drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb. N\u00eb pakic\u00eb dy gjyqtar\u00eb arsyetuan se KPA duhej t\u00eb zbatonte nj\u00eb vendim t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs Administrative t\u00eb Apelit dhe t\u00eb priste [&hellip;]<!-- 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":73453,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[13,114,362],"tags":[588,272,107,112],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/www.reporter.al\/wp-content\/uploads\/Arjana-Fullani-dhe-Evelina-Qirjako-duke-dal\u00eb-nga-seanca-n\u00eb-KPA.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"Arjana Fullani dhe Evelina Qirjako duke dal\u00eb nga seanca n\u00eb KPA | Foto : E. Hoxhaj","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/73452"}],"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=73452"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/73452\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":73454,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/73452\/revisions\/73454"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/73453"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=73452"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=73452"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=73452"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}