{"id":73704,"date":"2021-04-06T15:16:22","date_gmt":"2021-04-06T13:16:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/argumentet-e-kpa-qe-rikthyen-ne-detyre-prokurorin-arqile-koca\/2021\/04\/06\/"},"modified":"2023-04-06T21:54:26","modified_gmt":"2023-04-06T19:54:26","slug":"argumentet-e-kpa-qe-rikthyen-ne-detyre-prokurorin-arqile-koca","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/argumentet-e-kpa-qe-rikthyen-ne-detyre-prokurorin-arqile-koca\/2021\/04\/06\/","title":{"rendered":"Argumentet e KPA q\u00eb rikthyen n\u00eb detyr\u00eb prokurorin Arqile Ko\u00e7a"},"content":{"rendered":"

Shumica e an\u00ebtar\u00ebve t\u00eb Kolegjit t\u00eb Posa\u00e7\u00ebm t\u00eb Apelimit vler\u00ebsuan se Komisioni ka gabuar n\u00eb vler\u00ebsimin e kriterit t\u00eb pasuris\u00eb si dhe se ka cenuar t\u00eb drejt\u00ebn e prokurorit Arqile Ko\u00e7a p\u00ebr process t\u00eb rregullt, nd\u00ebrsa dy gjyqtare n\u00eb pakic\u00eb votuan pro l\u00ebnies n\u00eb fuqi t\u00eb shkarkimit.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
Prokurori Arqile Ko\u00e7a pas seanc\u00ebs d\u00ebgjimore n\u00eb KPK. Foto: LSA<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Vendimi i rikthimit n\u00eb detyr\u00eb p\u00ebr prokurorin Arqile Ko\u00e7a nuk kaloi pa debate n\u00eb Kolegjin e Posa\u00e7\u00ebm t\u00eb Apelimit. Sipas vendimit t\u00eb arsyetuar t\u00eb KPA-s\u00eb, kryesuesi i trup\u00ebs, Ardian Hajdari, relatori Sokol \u00c7omo dhe an\u00ebtarja Albana Shtylla e gjet\u00ebn t\u00eb drejt\u00eb ankimin e prokurorit t\u00eb Prokuroris\u00eb s\u00eb P\u00ebrgjithshme, duke vendosur si rrall\u00ebher\u00eb – rr\u00ebzimin e vendimit t\u00eb shkall\u00ebs s\u00eb par\u00eb t\u00eb vetingut.<\/p>\n

Nd\u00ebrsa an\u00ebtaret n\u00eb pakic\u00eb, Natasha Mulaj dhe Rezarta Schuetz i kund\u00ebrshtojn\u00eb vler\u00ebsimet e koleg\u00ebve si t\u00eb pabazuara dhe k\u00ebrkojn\u00eb l\u00ebnien n\u00eb fuqi t\u00eb shkarkimit.<\/p>\n

Arqilea Ko\u00e7a e ka filluar karrier\u00ebn n\u00eb sistemin e drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb n\u00eb Shqip\u00ebri n\u00eb vitet \u201990 dhe ka punuar p\u00ebr 16 vite n\u00eb Prokurorin\u00eb e P\u00ebrgjithshme, ku ka mbajtur edhe postet drejtuese t\u00eb drejtoris\u00eb s\u00eb luft\u00ebs kund\u00ebr krimit t\u00eb organizuar, drejtoris\u00eb s\u00eb hetimit dhe t\u00eb ndjekjes penale, si dhe t\u00eb zyr\u00ebs s\u00eb Marr\u00ebdh\u00ebnieve Juridiksionale me Jasht\u00eb.<\/p>\n

Ai u shkarkua nga Komisioni m\u00eb dat\u00eb 8 mars 2019 p\u00ebr deklarim t\u00eb pamjaftuesh\u00ebm p\u00ebr kriterin e kontrollit t\u00eb pasuris\u00eb si dhe p\u00ebr \u201ccenim t\u00eb besimit t\u00eb publikut te drejt\u00ebsia\u201d \u2013nj\u00eb vendim q\u00eb u rr\u00ebzua m\u00eb pas nga Kolegji.<\/p>\n

P\u00ebrfitimet si i pastreh\u00eb<\/strong><\/p>\n

Sipas vendimit t\u00eb KPK-s\u00eb, kur prokurori Ko\u00e7a p\u00ebrfitoi kredin\u00eb me kushte leht\u00ebsuese n\u00eb vler\u00ebn 5 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb n\u00eb vitin 2000, ai zot\u00ebronte nj\u00eb sip\u00ebrfaqe toke prej 830 m2, q\u00eb e bleu juridikisht tre muaj pas marrjes s\u00eb kredis\u00eb, si dhe banes\u00ebn provizore me sip\u00ebrfaqe 36 m2, ku ka banuar p\u00ebr periudh\u00ebn 1996-2000.<\/p>\n

KPK argumentoi se Ko\u00e7a duhej t\u00eb kishte p\u00ebrfituar kredin\u00eb e but\u00eb si funksionar q\u00eb ka pasur nevoj\u00eb p\u00ebr sip\u00ebrfaqe shtes\u00eb banimi n\u00eb vler\u00ebn 2.5 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb dhe jo n\u00eb shum\u00ebn 5 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb. Gjithashtu, Komisioni vler\u00ebsoi se Ko\u00e7a ka p\u00ebrfituar kredi t\u00eb but\u00eb m\u00eb shum\u00eb se nj\u00eb her\u00eb.<\/p>\n

Konkluzionet e KPK jan\u00eb kund\u00ebrshtuar si t\u00eb pabazuara n\u00eb ligj nga prokurori Ko\u00e7a, pretendimet e t\u00eb cilit jan\u00eb gjetur t\u00eb drejta edhe nga shumica e trupit gjykues t\u00eb KPA.<\/p>\n

Shumica v\u00ebren se deri n\u00eb dat\u00ebn e lidhjes s\u00eb kontrat\u00ebs s\u00eb kredis\u00eb, nuk rezultonte q\u00eb subjekti t\u00eb kishte n\u00eb pron\u00ebsi t\u00eb tij ndonj\u00eb banes\u00eb n\u00eb qytetin e Tiran\u00ebs.<\/p>\n

Lidhur me posedimin e objektit me sip\u00ebrfaqe 36 m2, t\u00eb nd\u00ebrtuar p\u00ebr q\u00ebllime strehimi, shumica \u00e7mon se nd\u00ebrtesa nuk p\u00ebrmbushte asnj\u00eb prej k\u00ebrkesave themelore p\u00ebr t\u2019u vler\u00ebsuar me destinacion ekonomik banimin.<\/p>\n

Sipas Kolegjit, n\u00eb k\u00ebto kushte objekti n\u00eb fjal\u00eb nuk ndikon n\u00eb analiz\u00ebn lidhur me p\u00ebrmbushjen e kritereve p\u00ebr p\u00ebrfitimin e kredis\u00eb s\u00eb but\u00eb.<\/p>\n

KPA vler\u00ebson gjithashtu se kredia me kushte leht\u00ebsuese \u00ebsht\u00eb p\u00ebrfituar n\u00eb p\u00ebrputhje me parashikimet ligjore dhe n\u00ebnligjore t\u00eb koh\u00ebs dhe se nga hetimi ka rezultuar se subjekti e ka fituar vet\u00ebm nj\u00eb her\u00eb. Gjithashtu, Kolegji v\u00ebren se subjektit nuk i \u00ebsht\u00eb b\u00ebr\u00eb me dije fakti i pretenduar nga Komisioni se kredia \u00ebsht\u00eb p\u00ebrfituar m\u00eb shum\u00eb se nj\u00eb her\u00eb, duke cenuar t\u00eb drejt\u00ebn e tij p\u00ebr proces t\u00eb rregullt ligjor.<\/p>\n

Shumica ka rr\u00ebzuar edhe konkluzionin tjet\u00ebr t\u00eb KPK-s\u00eb se Ko\u00e7a ka p\u00ebrfituar n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb t\u00eb padrejt\u00eb nj\u00eb banes\u00eb me sip\u00ebrfaqe 100 m2 n\u00eb Kor\u00e7\u00eb n\u00eb korrik t\u00eb vitit 2000, nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb q\u00eb n\u00eb mars t\u00eb po atij viti kishte marr\u00eb kredin\u00eb me kushte leht\u00ebsuese.<\/p>\n

Sipas KPA-s\u00eb, privatizimi i banes\u00ebs dhe regjistrimi i saj n\u00eb ZVRPP Kor\u00e7\u00eb ka qen\u00eb n\u00eb p\u00ebrputhje me parashikimet ligjore n\u00eb fuqi, pasi vendimi i K\u00ebshillit t\u00eb Ministrave i vitit 1999, synonte garantimin e nj\u00eb statusi t\u00eb ve\u00e7ant\u00eb p\u00ebr funksionar\u00ebt politik\u00eb dhe n\u00ebpun\u00ebsit civil\u00eb t\u00eb administrat\u00ebs s\u00eb lart\u00eb shtet\u00ebrore, ku nj\u00eb nd\u00ebr t\u00eb drejtat ishte edhe ajo p\u00ebr t’u strehuar n\u00eb kushte t\u00eb p\u00ebrshtatshme pran\u00eb vendit t\u00eb pun\u00ebs.<\/p>\n

Kolegji argumenton se subjektit i kishte lindur e drejta e statusit si “i pastreh\u00eb” q\u00eb prej vitit 1993, bazuar n\u00eb nj\u00eb VKM t\u00eb atij viti, pasi ai jetonte me qira n\u00eb nj\u00eb banes\u00eb private.<\/p>\n

Shumica e vler\u00ebson privatizimin e banes\u00ebs n\u00eb Kor\u00e7\u00eb si p\u00ebrfitim t\u00eb vonuar n\u00eb koh\u00eb i nj\u00eb t\u00eb drejte t\u00eb k\u00ebrkuar nga prokurori Ko\u00e7a n\u00eb p\u00ebrputhje me legjislacionin n\u00eb fuqi.<\/p>\n

Lidhur me konstatimin e KPK-s\u00eb se subjekti kishte p\u00ebrfituar kredi t\u00eb but\u00eb m\u00eb shum\u00eb se nj\u00ebher\u00eb, shumica vler\u00ebson se kredia me kushte leht\u00ebsuese e p\u00ebrfituar n\u00eb vitin 2000, nuk mund t\u00eb barazohet apo t\u00eb trajtohet nj\u00ebsoj me shum\u00ebn e p\u00ebrfituar sipas ligjit \u201cP\u00ebr kontributin e shtetit p\u00ebr familjet e pastreha\u201d t\u00eb vitit 1995, q\u00eb garantonte \u00e7do familje e pastreh\u00eb t\u00eb p\u00ebrfitonte falas t\u00eb drejt\u00ebn p\u00ebr t\u00eb shpenzuar nj\u00eb shum\u00eb parash.<\/p>\n

Gjyqtaret n\u00eb pakic\u00eb, Natasha Mulaj dhe Rezarta Schuetz shprehen se kan\u00eb votuar kund\u00ebr vendimit t\u00eb shumic\u00ebs p\u00ebr konfirmimin n\u00eb detyr\u00eb t\u00eb prokurorit Arqiela Ko\u00e7a, duke konkluduar se se ai nuk ka arritur nivel t\u00eb besuesh\u00ebm p\u00ebr kriterin e vler\u00ebsimit t\u00eb pasuris\u00eb.<\/p>\n

Pakica e nis arsyetimin me vler\u00ebsimin e privatizimit t\u00eb banes\u00ebn n\u00eb Kor\u00e7\u00eb n\u00eb korrik t\u00eb vitit 2000. An\u00ebtaret n\u00eb\u00a0 pakic\u00eb sjellin n\u00eb v\u00ebmendje se kur subjekti ka kryer k\u00ebt\u00eb transaksion, kishte 6 vjet q\u00eb jetonte dhe punonte n\u00eb Tiran\u00eb, pran\u00eb Prokuroris\u00eb s\u00eb P\u00ebrgjithshme dhe se nuk kishte m\u00eb nevoj\u00eb p\u00ebr strehim n\u00eb Kor\u00e7\u00eb.<\/p>\n

Ato shtojn\u00eb se kat\u00ebr muaj para privatizimit t\u00eb k\u00ebsaj banese, Ko\u00e7a kishte p\u00ebrfituar edhe nj\u00eb kredi, si i pastreh\u00eb n\u00eb qytetin e Tiran\u00ebs. An\u00ebtaret n\u00eb pakic\u00eb evidentojn\u00eb faktin se sht\u00ebpia e privatizuar n\u00eb Kor\u00e7\u00eb e vler\u00ebsuar me 72 mij\u00eb lek\u00eb n\u00eb momentin e lidhjes s\u00eb kontrat\u00ebs, \u00ebsht\u00eb shitur nga prokurori Ko\u00e7a 8 muaj m\u00eb von\u00eb p\u00ebr vler\u00ebn 1 milion e 250 mij\u00eb lek\u00eb, n\u00eb nj\u00eb shum\u00eb disa her\u00eb m\u00eb t\u00eb madhe.<\/p>\n

N\u00eb mendimin e pakic\u00ebs konstatohet se subjekti i rivler\u00ebsimit nuk e ka deklaruar k\u00ebt\u00eb transaksion apo t\u00eb ardhur t\u00eb p\u00ebrfituara prej tij, duke e deklaruar p\u00ebr her\u00eb t\u00eb par\u00eb n\u00eb deklarat\u00ebn veting.<\/p>\n

Shpjegimet e subjektit se ishte deklarimi i par\u00eb, se nuk kishte nj\u00eb rubrik\u00eb p\u00ebr krijimin e nj\u00eb t\u00eb ardhure t\u00eb krijuar p\u00ebrpara, nuk e bind pakic\u00ebn. “Mungesa e njohjes s\u00eb ligjit \u00ebsht\u00eb e papranueshme p\u00ebr nj\u00eb prokuror karriere, i cili ushtron detyra me p\u00ebrgjegj\u00ebsi n\u00eb interpretimin e ligjit,” vler\u00ebsojn\u00eb Mulaj dhe Schuetz.<\/p>\n

Ato vijojn\u00eb argumentimin se Ko\u00e7a pushoi s\u00eb qeni i pastreh\u00eb n\u00eb vendin ku punonte, n\u00eb mars t\u00eb vitit 2000, kur p\u00ebrfitoi kredin\u00eb e but\u00eb me vler\u00ebn 5 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb.<\/p>\n

Dy an\u00ebtaret n\u00eb pakic\u00eb sjellin n\u00eb v\u00ebmendje edhe faktin se subjekti kishte p\u00ebrfituar nga privatizimi i nj\u00eb banese n\u00eb Delvin\u00eb n\u00eb vitin 1993 me prind\u00ebrit dhe ishte bashk\u00ebpronar n\u00eb 1\u20444 pjes\u00eb takuese.<\/p>\n

“S\u00eb treti, subjekti i rivler\u00ebsimit kishte nd\u00ebrtuar tanim\u00eb \u2013 pa leje \u2013 nj\u00eb objekt n\u00eb Linz\u00eb ku edhe banonte q\u00eb nga viti 1996, mbi nj\u00eb sip\u00ebrfaqe toke bujq\u00ebsore prej 830 m2, t\u00eb cil\u00ebn e kishte bler\u00eb dy muaj p\u00ebrpara privatizimit n\u00eb Kor\u00e7\u00eb\u2026,\u201d vijon pakica dhe vler\u00ebson se privatizimi i k\u00ebsaj pasurie shtet\u00ebrore nga subjekti, n\u00eb momentin dhe n\u00eb rrethanat kur ky fakt ndodhi, d\u00ebshmon p\u00ebrfitim p\u00ebr shkak t\u00eb funksionit.<\/p>\n

“Kjo ilustrohet qart\u00eb edhe nga fakti q\u00eb subjekti e shiti pron\u00ebn brenda pak muajsh [mars 2001], n\u00eb nj\u00eb vler\u00eb 17 her\u00eb m\u00eb t\u00eb lart\u00eb sesa kostoja e blerjes,” v\u00ebren pakica dhe thekson se shumica duhej ta kishte interpretuar si situat\u00eb, e cila minimalisht cenon besimin e publikut.<\/p>\n

Mulaj dhe Schuetz e gjejn\u00eb t\u00eb drejt\u00eb konkluzionin e KPK se, n\u00eb kushtet q\u00eb subjekti posedonte nj\u00eb banes\u00eb provizore me sip\u00ebrfaqe 36 m2, mund t\u00eb p\u00ebrfitonte kredi leht\u00ebsuese vet\u00ebm p\u00ebr shtes\u00eb banimi n\u00eb shum\u00ebn 2.5 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb.<\/p>\n

Nd\u00ebrtimet pa leje<\/strong><\/p>\n

Sipas pakic\u00ebs, nj\u00eb nd\u00ebr rrethanat q\u00eb p\u00ebrb\u00ebjn\u00eb baz\u00eb t\u00eb konkluzionit p\u00ebrfundimtar t\u00eb Komisionit p\u00ebr shkarkimin e subjektit, lidhet me nd\u00ebrtimin pa leje t\u00eb banes\u00ebs provizore 36 m2 n\u00eb tok\u00ebn me sip\u00ebrfaqe 830 m2, prej nga e kan\u00eb zanafill\u00ebn 9 pasuri t\u00eb tjera si dhe mosdeklarimi i k\u00ebsaj prone n\u00eb vitin 2003.<\/p>\n

Pakica v\u00ebren se subjekti i rivler\u00ebsimit ka p\u00ebrdorur tok\u00ebn bujq\u00ebsore n\u00eb kund\u00ebrshtim me destinacionin p\u00ebr periudh\u00ebn 1996 – maj 2000 duke deklaruar vet\u00ebm k\u00ebt\u00eb pasuri n\u00eb vitin 2003, por asnj\u00ebher\u00eb sht\u00ebpin\u00eb e nd\u00ebrtuar mbi t\u00eb, q\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb p\u00ebrpjekur ta legalizoj\u00eb.<\/p>\n

“M\u00eb konkretisht, n\u00eb vitin 2005 subjekti ka b\u00ebr\u00eb vet\u00ebdeklarim p\u00ebr legalizim t\u00eb objektit sht\u00ebpi banimi me sip\u00ebrfaqe 36 m2 dhe ka specifikuar se vet\u00ebdeklarimi ka p\u00ebr q\u00ebllim kthimin e tok\u00ebs ar\u00eb n\u00eb truall”, konstaton pakica dhe shprehet se Ko\u00e7a ka treguar qasje selektive lidhur me transaksionet e tjera p\u00ebrpara vitit 2009, q\u00eb rrjedhin nga kjo pasuri.<\/p>\n

Sipas pakic\u00ebs, konkluzioni i shumic\u00ebs, bazuar n\u00eb pretendimet e subjektit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit, se objekti nuk kishte themele e p\u00ebr pasoj\u00eb nuk i n\u00ebnshtrohej deklarimit, bie ndesh me udh\u00ebzimet e formularit t\u00eb deklarimit p\u00ebr vitin 2003.<\/p>\n

Mulaj dhe Shcuetz konkludojn\u00eb se, kjo qasje e subjektit nd\u00ebr vite dhe gjat\u00eb procesit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit, p\u00ebrve\u00e7se v\u00ebshtir\u00ebson kontrollin e pasuris\u00eb s\u00eb tij, duhet par\u00eb edhe n\u00eb vler\u00ebsimin t\u00ebr\u00ebsor n\u00eb kuad\u00ebr t\u00eb besimit t\u00eb publikut te drejt\u00ebsia.<\/p>\n

Shumica nga ana tjet\u00ebr thekson se Komisioni nuk ka vler\u00ebsuar n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb objektive faktet e provuara gjat\u00eb hetimit administrativ lidhur me nd\u00ebrtimin e k\u00ebtij objekti, rrethanat n\u00eb t\u00eb cilat \u00ebsht\u00eb kryer veprimi n\u00eb kund\u00ebrshtim me ligjin, shkaqet q\u00eb e kan\u00eb diktuar at\u00eb dhe periudh\u00ebn e larg\u00ebt n\u00eb t\u00eb cil\u00ebn ka ndodhur ky fakt. Sipas shumic\u00ebs, n\u00eb at\u00eb periudh\u00eb ka munguar kuadri i brendsh\u00ebm rregullator apo nd\u00ebrkomb\u00ebtar n\u00eb drejtim t\u00eb standardeve t\u00eb zbatueshme t\u00eb etik\u00ebs s\u00eb funksionar\u00ebve t\u00eb drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb, t\u00eb cilat do t\u00eb sh\u00ebrbenin si baz\u00eb p\u00ebr vler\u00ebsimin e sjelljeve t\u00eb cilat cenojn\u00eb besimin e publikut te sistemi i drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb.<\/p>\n

“\u2026n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb t\u00eb gabuar dhe n\u00eb shkelje edhe t\u00eb parimit t\u00eb proporcionalitetit, Komisioni ka arritur n\u00eb p\u00ebrfundimin se nd\u00ebrtimi n\u00eb vitin 1996 i objektit provizor ka cenuar besimin e publikut te sistemi i drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb,” konkludon shumica dhe vler\u00ebson se fakti q\u00eb subjekti ka jetuar s\u00eb bashku me familjen n\u00eb nj\u00eb nd\u00ebrtes\u00eb nuk ofronte kushtet minimale t\u00eb jetes\u00ebs, tregon se ai ka qen\u00eb i pakorruptuesh\u00ebm.<\/p>\n

“\u2026ai sjell d\u00ebshmin\u00eb p\u00ebr figur\u00ebn e nj\u00eb funksionari t\u00eb drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb n\u00eb kushte t\u00eb mjerueshme jetese, prov\u00eb e faktit t\u00eb pretenduar edhe nga vet\u00eb subjekti i rivler\u00ebsimit se ka vuajtur gjat\u00eb periudh\u00ebs 10-vje\u00e7are t\u00eb karrier\u00ebs s\u00eb tij problematika lidhur me strehimin, gj\u00eb q\u00eb mund t\u00eb mos kishte ndodhur n\u00ebse ai do kishte abuzuar me detyr\u00ebn dhe funksionin e tij p\u00ebr q\u00ebllime p\u00ebrfitimi personal, ” \u00e7mon shumica.<\/p>\n

N\u00eb vijim, pakica konstaton se Ko\u00e7a nuk ka deklaruar gjat\u00eb periudh\u00ebs 2009-2013 t\u00eb drejtat reale mbi 9 pasuri t\u00eb paluajtshme me vlera t\u00eb konsiderueshme – nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb q\u00eb n\u00eb deklaratat periodike vjetore p\u00ebr vitet 2009 dhe 2010, ka zgjedhur t\u00eb pasqyroj\u00eb t\u00eb ardhurat nga shitja e dy pronave, n\u00eb funksion t\u00eb justifikimit t\u00eb burimeve t\u00eb financimit p\u00ebr pasuri t\u00eb tjera t\u00eb tij n\u00eb Lukov\u00eb e Voskopoj\u00eb.<\/p>\n

Mulaj dhe Schuetz e kund\u00ebrshtojn\u00eb vler\u00ebsimin e shumic\u00ebs se subjekti nuk kishte hipotek\u00eb e t\u00eb drejt\u00eb p\u00ebrdorimi mbi k\u00ebto pasuri, duke evidentuar faktin se ai ka p\u00ebrfituar t\u00eb ardhura nga shitja e tyre. Ato konkludojn\u00eb se sjellja e subjektit nd\u00ebr vite lidhur me k\u00ebto pasuri, duhet t\u00eb p\u00ebrb\u00ebnte minimalisht nj\u00eb nd\u00ebr elementet q\u00eb tregonin deklarim t\u00eb pamjaftuesh\u00ebm.<\/p>\n

Por shumica ka nj\u00eb tjet\u00ebr argumentim, duke vler\u00ebsuar se detyrimi p\u00ebr t\u00eb deklaruar pasurit\u00eb e paluajtshme n\u00eb p\u00ebrdorim dhe zot\u00ebrim t\u00eb subjekteve rivler\u00ebsuese \u00ebsht\u00eb p\u00ebrcaktuar n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb t\u00eb shprehur p\u00ebr her\u00eb t\u00eb par\u00eb n\u00eb legjislacionin e posa\u00e7\u00ebm q\u00eb normon procesin e vetingut.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Shumica e an\u00ebtar\u00ebve t\u00eb Kolegjit t\u00eb Posa\u00e7\u00ebm t\u00eb Apelimit vler\u00ebsuan se Komisioni ka gabuar n\u00eb vler\u00ebsimin e kriterit t\u00eb pasuris\u00eb si dhe se ka cenuar t\u00eb drejt\u00ebn e prokurorit Arqile Ko\u00e7a p\u00ebr process t\u00eb rregullt, nd\u00ebrsa dy gjyqtare n\u00eb pakic\u00eb votuan pro l\u00ebnies n\u00eb fuqi t\u00eb shkarkimit.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":637,"featured_media":73705,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[13,415,114,362],"tags":[112,119,175],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/www.reporter.al\/wp-content\/uploads\/20190306_212536_060319001-1_6tXAIZ5.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"Prokurori i Prokurorise e Pergjithshme, Arqile Koca, duke dale nga nje seance e Komisionit te Pavarur te Kualifikimit, KPK, i cili ka nisur sot seancen degjimore me te. Koca po kalon ne procesin e rivleresimit kalimtar, i njohur ndryshe si procesi i vettingut, i cili do te hetoje pasurite e tij.\t\t\/r\/n\/r\/nProsecutor at the General Prosecutor's Office Arqile Koca, leaves after a hearing session of the Independent Qualification Commission, IQC. Koca is undergoing the process of revaluation, also known as vetting process, that will investigate the assets, figure and personal skills.","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/73704"}],"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=73704"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/73704\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":73706,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/73704\/revisions\/73706"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/73705"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=73704"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=73704"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=73704"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}