{"id":73794,"date":"2021-03-22T10:28:00","date_gmt":"2021-03-22T09:28:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/kpa-thote-se-gjyqtari-dritan-seci-fshehu-pasurite-duke-manipuluar-te-verteten\/2021\/03\/22\/"},"modified":"2023-04-06T21:59:39","modified_gmt":"2023-04-06T19:59:39","slug":"kpa-thote-se-gjyqtari-dritan-seci-fshehu-pasurite-duke-manipuluar-te-verteten","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/kpa-thote-se-gjyqtari-dritan-seci-fshehu-pasurite-duke-manipuluar-te-verteten\/2021\/03\/22\/","title":{"rendered":"KPA thot\u00eb se gjyqtari Dritan Seci fshehu pasurit\u00eb duke manipuluar t\u00eb v\u00ebrtet\u00ebn"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Kolegji i Posa\u00e7\u00ebm i Apelimit i vler\u00ebson si jo bind\u00ebse dhe n\u00eb kund\u00ebrshtim me provat deklarimet e ish-Kryetarit t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Tropoj\u00ebs, Dritan Seci dhe konkludon se ai ka fshehur nj\u00eb apartament n\u00eb Tiran\u00eb duke u p\u00ebrpjekur t\u00eb manipuloj\u00eb t\u00eb v\u00ebrtet\u00ebn \u2013 si dhe se \u00ebsht\u00eb p\u00ebrpjekur t\u00eb shmangi dh\u00ebnien e shpjegimeve p\u00ebr arsyet q\u00eb q\u00ebndrojn\u00eb n\u00eb themel t\u00eb dhurimit t\u00eb nj\u00eb vlere 20 mij\u00eb euro n\u00eb favor t\u00eb tij.<!--more--><\/p>\n<figure id=\"attachment_63690\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-63690\" style=\"width: 600px\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reporter.al\/wp-content\/uploads\/20190612_182012_120619011-1_6EeZIxw.jpg\"><img decoding=\"async\" loading=\"lazy\" class=\"size-large wp-image-63690\" src=\"https:\/\/www.reporter.al\/wp-content\/uploads\/20190612_182012_120619011-1_6EeZIxw-600x347.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"600\" height=\"347\" data-id=\"63690\" \/><\/a><figcaption id=\"caption-attachment-63690\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Trupa gjyq\u00ebsore e KPA-s\u00eb gjat\u00eb nj\u00eb seance publike.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p>Megjith\u00ebse Kolegji i Posa\u00e7\u00ebm i Apelimit, KPA i ka gjetur t\u00eb bazuara disa prej pretendimeve n\u00eb ankimin e ish-Kryetarit t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Tropoj\u00ebs, Dritan Seci ndaj vendimit t\u00eb Komisionit t\u00eb Pavarur t\u00eb Kualifikimit, KPK p\u00ebr largimin e tij nga detyra, tre prej shkaqeve jan\u00eb rigjetur shkarkuese.<\/p>\n<p>Trupi gjykues i KPA i kryesuar nga Rezarta Schuetz, me relator Ardian Hajdarin dhe an\u00ebtar\u00eb Ina Ram\u00ebn, Natasha Mulajn dhe Sokol \u00c7omon, vendos\u00ebn m\u00eb 24 n\u00ebntor 2020 t\u00eb l\u00ebn\u00eb n\u00eb fuqi vendimin e KPK p\u00ebr shkarkimin e Secit, pasi u konstatua munges\u00eb burimesh t\u00eb ligjshme n\u00eb disa vite, si dhe u konkluduan fshehja e nj\u00eb apartamenti n\u00eb Tiran\u00eb dhe e nj\u00eb dhurate n\u00eb shum\u00ebn 20 mij\u00eb euro.<\/p>\n<p>Dritan Seci e ka filluar karrier\u00ebn n\u00eb gjyq\u00ebsor n\u00eb vitin 2004 si gjyqtar pran\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Rrethit Tropoj\u00eb. N\u00eb vitin 2009, ai u em\u00ebrua kryetar i Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Tropoj\u00ebs, detyr\u00eb t\u00eb cil\u00ebn e mbajti deri m\u00eb dat\u00eb 11 mars 2019, kur u shkarkua nga KPK p\u00ebr problemet e konstatuar n\u00eb kriterin e pasuris\u00eb. Seci u vler\u00ebsua i p\u00ebrshtatsh\u00ebm p\u00ebr past\u00ebrtin\u00eb e figur\u00ebs dhe se kishte arritur nivel minimal kualifikues p\u00ebr profesionalizmin.<\/p>\n<p>Ashtu si Komisioni, edhe KPA konkludon se gjyqtari Seci ka fshehur nj\u00eb apartament me sip\u00ebrfaqe 77 m2 n\u00eb \u201cRrug\u00ebn e Durr\u00ebsit\u201d n\u00eb Tiran\u00eb, t\u00eb porositur n\u00eb vitin 2008 kundrejt vler\u00ebs 50 mij\u00eb euro.<\/p>\n<p>Komisioni, ka konkluduar se Seci e ka fshehur apartamentin n\u00eb Tiran\u00eb dhe pagesat p\u00ebrkat\u00ebse, si n\u00eb deklarat\u00ebn periodike t\u00eb pasuris\u00eb t\u00eb vitit 2008, ashtu dhe n\u00eb vijim. Shpjegimet e subjektit se, k\u00ebt\u00eb apartament e dispononte nj\u00eb mik i tij, e ka p\u00ebrdorur p\u00ebr periudh\u00ebn 2014 \u2013 2015 dhe se ka paguar vet\u00ebm sh\u00ebrbimet, Komisioni e konsideroi si deklarim t\u00eb rrem\u00eb, pasi rezultonte q\u00eb ai t\u00eb kishte lidhur kontrat\u00eb porosie q\u00eb prej vitit 2008.<\/p>\n<p>Kolegji analizon deklarimet e subjektit t\u00eb dh\u00ebna n\u00eb funksion t\u00eb procesit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit, prej nga v\u00ebren se v\u00ebren se Seci ka dh\u00ebn\u00eb shpjegime t\u00eb ndryshme. N\u00eb p\u00ebrgjigjet e pyet\u00ebsor\u00ebve nr. 1 dhe 2, ai nuk e ka p\u00ebrmendur faktin q\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb apartament e kishte porositur vet\u00eb, nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb q\u00eb pasi \u00ebsht\u00eb njohur me rezultatet e hetimit t\u00eb KPK, ka pranuar se ka nj\u00eb kontrat\u00eb porosie, por ka k\u00ebmb\u00ebngulur se ky apartament nuk ka kaluar asnj\u00ebher\u00eb n\u00eb pron\u00ebsin\u00eb e tij.<\/p>\n<p>Seci ka deklaruar se me administratorin e shoq\u00ebris\u00eb nd\u00ebrtuese kishte miq\u00ebsi dhe se ai i kishte th\u00ebn\u00eb se do t\u00eb nd\u00ebrtonte nj\u00eb kompleks tjet\u00ebr dhe kishte vendosur q\u00eb t\u00eb mos e blinte apartamentin e porositur m\u00eb pare. Gjithashtu, ka dekjlaruar se administrator i shoq\u00ebris\u00eb, M.L. i kishte kthyer kaparin n\u00eb shum\u00ebn 4 mij\u00eb euro t\u00eb paguar n\u00eb vitin 2008. Ai ka vijuar se p\u00ebr shkak t\u00eb miq\u00ebsis\u00eb, e ka p\u00ebrdorur k\u00ebt\u00eb apartament n\u00eb vitet 2014 &#8211; 2015 pa qira dhe se kontrata e porosis\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb p\u00ebrdorur p\u00ebr lidhjen e kontrat\u00ebs s\u00eb energjis\u00eb elektrike, p\u00ebr leht\u00ebsi administrative, pasi formalisht nuk ishte revokuar.<\/p>\n<p>P\u00ebr t\u00eb mb\u00ebshtetur pretendimet e tij, Seci ka depozituar edhe nj\u00eb deklarat\u00eb noteriale t\u00eb administratorit t\u00eb shoq\u00ebris\u00eb nd\u00ebrtuese M.L.. Por, Kolegji v\u00ebren se M.L. ka deklaruar t\u00eb nj\u00ebjtat q\u00ebndrime t\u00eb subjektit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit t\u00eb mbajtura n\u00eb p\u00ebrgjigjet e rezultateve t\u00eb hetimit. Sipas trupit gjykues, p\u00ebr shkak se kjo deklarat\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb kryer gjat\u00eb procesit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit, krijon bindjen se \u00ebsht\u00eb konceptuar n\u00eb favor t\u00eb pretendimeve t\u00eb Secit.<\/p>\n<p>KPA konstaton se kontrata e porosis\u00eb nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb deklaruar n\u00eb vitet 2008, nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb q\u00eb Seci n\u00eb deklaratat periodike t\u00eb viteve 2010 dhe 2011 ka sh\u00ebnuar si adres\u00eb banimi pik\u00ebrisht k\u00ebt\u00eb apartament n\u00eb Tiran\u00eb. \u201c[\u2026]\u00e7ka do t\u00eb thot\u00eb se subjekti i rivler\u00ebsimit ka vazhduar ta p\u00ebrdor\u00eb si apartamentin e tij dhe jo vet\u00ebm n\u00eb periudh\u00ebn q\u00eb ai pretendon (2014-2015)\u201d, evidenton Kolegji.<\/p>\n<p>Bazar n\u00eb dokumentacionin e administruar gjat\u00eb hetimit n\u00eb KPK, Kolegji rr\u00ebzon edhe pretendimin tjet\u00ebr t\u00eb Secit se, apartamenti i porositur prej tij n\u00eb vitin 2008 \u00ebsht\u00eb bler\u00eb n\u00eb vitin 2015 nga shtetasi R.F. . Sipas KPA, apartamenti i porositur nga gjyqtari Seci ndodhet n\u00eb katin e dyt\u00eb t\u00eb pallatit, kurse ai i shk\u00ebmbyer mes R.F. dhe shoq\u00ebris\u00eb nd\u00ebrtuese gjendet n\u00eb katin e kat\u00ebrt. \u201c[\u2026]edhe pse duket e nj\u00ebjta sip\u00ebrfaqe nd\u00ebrtimi, nuk rezulton t\u00eb jet\u00eb i nj\u00ebjt\u00eb pozicioni gjeografik i apartamentit ku ka banuar subjekti i rivler\u00ebsimit dhe kati i apartamentit p\u00ebr t\u00eb cilin pretendohet se e ka bler\u00eb R. F\u201d, konstaton Kolegji.<\/p>\n<p>N\u00eb parashtrimet e dor\u00ebzuara n\u00eb Kolegj, Seci ka sqaruar se, kontrata ku ka paguar kaparin nuk ka qen\u00eb e realizuar para noterit dhe, pasi i mungonte ana formale, nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb revokuar.<\/p>\n<p>Trupi gjykues v\u00ebren se ky \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb q\u00ebndrim tjet\u00ebr nga sa ka mbajtur Seci n\u00eb Komision, n\u00eb p\u00ebrgjigje t\u00eb pyet\u00ebsor\u00ebve p\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb pasuri. \u201cFillimisht subjekti i rivler\u00ebsimit n\u00eb pyet\u00ebsorin standard t\u00eb Komisionit ka th\u00ebn\u00eb se M. L ia kishte dh\u00ebn\u00eb n\u00eb p\u00ebrdorim apartamentin, pa ekspozuar kontrat\u00ebn e porosis\u00eb me shoq\u00ebrin\u00eb e nd\u00ebrtimit {***} ShPK. [\u2026]M\u00eb tej, i pyetur dhe i v\u00ebn\u00eb n\u00eb dijeni nga Komisioni, pasi nga hetimi administrativ kryesisht ka rezultuar nj\u00eb kontrat\u00eb sip\u00ebrmarrjeje p\u00ebr apartamentin e p\u00ebrdorur, subjekti i rivler\u00ebsimit e pranon q\u00eb ka nj\u00eb kontrat\u00eb, por jo q\u00eb ky apartament ka kaluar n\u00eb pron\u00ebsi t\u00eb tij, pasi sipas tij do t\u00eb nd\u00ebrtohej nj\u00eb tjet\u00ebr kompleks[\u2026]\u201d, konstaton KPA.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cPra, si\u00e7 v\u00ebrehet, q\u00ebndrimet e ndryshme t\u00eb subjektit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit gjat\u00eb procesit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit, b\u00ebjn\u00eb q\u00eb shpjegimet dhe p\u00ebrgjigjet e tij t\u00eb jen\u00eb t\u00eb pabesueshme dhe jobind\u00ebse, kjo e mb\u00ebshtetur edhe me dokumente dhe rrethana t\u00eb tjera t\u00eb rezultuara gjat\u00eb shqyrtimit administrativ n\u00eb Komision dhe atij gjyq\u00ebsor n\u00eb Kolegj, \u00e7ka e b\u00ebn evident faktin se subjekti i rivler\u00ebsimit p\u00ebrpiqet t\u00eb manipuloj\u00eb t\u00eb v\u00ebrtet\u00ebn\u201d, citohet n\u00eb vijim n\u00eb vendim.<\/p>\n<p>N\u00eb p\u00ebrfundim, trupi gjykues i KPA konkludon se gjyqtari Seciu ka kryer fshehje t\u00eb k\u00ebsaj pasurie,<\/p>\n<p>Gjat\u00eb hetimit administrativ, KPK zbuloi edhe nj\u00eb transaksion t\u00eb dyshimt\u00eb dhurimi n\u00eb vler\u00eb t\u00eb konsiderueshme nga nj\u00eb person me shtet\u00ebsi britanike n\u00eb favor t\u00eb gjyqtarit Seci n\u00eb vitin 2014. Megjith\u00ebse ky i fundit e ka mohuar nj\u00eb gj\u00eb t\u00eb till\u00eb, Komisioni konkludoi se Seci e ka fshehur dhurimin e vler\u00ebs 20 mij\u00eb euro.<\/p>\n<p>Drejtoria e P\u00ebrgjithshme e Parandalimit t\u00eb Pastrimit t\u00eb Parave, ka konfirmuar se n\u00eb em\u00ebr t\u00eb shtetasit Dritan Seci ka raportime p\u00ebr deklarat\u00ebn noteriale t\u00eb nj\u00ebanshme t\u00eb hartuar p\u00ebrpara noteres E. L. nga shtetasi B. M. i cili deklaronte se, nga t\u00eb ardhurat e tij personale nga puna, i ka dh\u00ebn\u00eb n\u00eb form\u00eb ndihme mikut t\u00eb tij Dritan Seci shum\u00ebn 20 mij\u00eb euro.<\/p>\n<p>Por, nj\u00eb udh\u00ebtim i kryer n\u00eb Kosov\u00eb, ka forcuar dyshimet e Komisionit p\u00ebr lidhjen e mundshme mes gjyqtarit Seci dhe shtetasit B.M., pasi ky i fundit ka l\u00ebvizur me makin\u00ebn q\u00eb p\u00ebrdorej prej subjektit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit.<\/p>\n<p>Seci e ka mohuar t\u00eb ket\u00eb njohje me B.M.. Ai ka pretenduar se deklarata e B.M. para noterit \u00ebsht\u00eb e nj\u00ebanshme dhe nuk provon n\u00eb asnj\u00eb situat\u00eb marrjen nga Seci t\u00eb shum\u00ebs s\u00eb pasqyruar n\u00eb deklarat\u00eb. \u201cSipas k\u00ebsaj logjike, \u00e7dokush mund t\u00eb b\u00ebj\u00eb nj\u00eb deklarat\u00eb t\u00eb till\u00eb dhe t\u00eb mund t\u00eb vendos\u00eb \u00e7do lloj shume, por kjo kurrsesi nuk mund t\u00eb provoj\u00eb faktin se di\u00e7ka e till\u00eb ka ndodhur v\u00ebrtet\u201d, ka deklaruar Seci.<\/p>\n<p>Kolegji v\u00ebren se deklarata noteriale \u00ebsht\u00eb hartuar n\u00eb vitin 2014, kur procesi i rivler\u00ebsimit nuk kishte nisur, por nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb subjekti ka pasur detyrimin q\u00eb n\u00eb deklarimet pran\u00eb ILDKPKI t\u00eb evidentonte \u00e7do transaksion t\u00eb kryer prej tij ose n\u00eb favor t\u00eb tij.<\/p>\n<p>\u201c[\u2026]fakti i dokumentimit t\u00eb k\u00ebsaj shume me veprim juridik t\u00eb nj\u00ebansh\u00ebm, kryer n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb form\u00eb, i ka lejuar subjektit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit t\u00eb shmang\u00eb dokumentimin e dhurimit dhe pranimin nga ana e tij e, n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb, edhe detyrimet p\u00ebr ta deklaruar nd\u00ebr vite. Kjo m\u00ebnyr\u00eb duket edhe si nj\u00eb p\u00ebrpjekje p\u00ebr t\u00eb shmangur p\u00ebrgjegj\u00ebsin\u00eb apo dh\u00ebnien e shpjegimeve p\u00ebr arsyet q\u00eb q\u00ebndrojn\u00eb n\u00eb themel t\u00eb k\u00ebtij dhurimi\u201d, konstaton Kolegji dhe arsyeton se deklarimet e shpjegimet q\u00eb b\u00ebn gjyqtari Seci n\u00eb lidhje me k\u00ebt\u00eb fakt, konsiderohen se tentojn\u00eb t\u00eb fshehin t\u00eb v\u00ebrtet\u00ebn.<\/p>\n<p>Trupi gjykues vler\u00ebson se p\u00ebrgjigjet dhe shpjegimet q\u00eb ka dh\u00ebn\u00eb Seci gjat\u00eb procesit administrativ jan\u00eb n\u00eb kund\u00ebrshtim me dokumentacionin e administruar n\u00eb dosje.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cPavar\u00ebsisht se subjekti deklaron se nuk e njeh shtetasin dhurues t\u00eb shum\u00ebs 20.000 euro, nga dokumentacioni i ekstraktuar nga sistemi TIMS, rezultoi se si subjekti i rivler\u00ebsimit, ashtu edhe B. M. kishin udh\u00ebtuar nga Shqip\u00ebria n\u00eb drejtim t\u00eb Kosov\u00ebs, n\u00eb t\u00eb nj\u00ebjt\u00ebn pik\u00eb kufitare Qaf\u00eb Morin\u00eb. Kalimi i kufirit \u00ebsht\u00eb b\u00ebr\u00eb me t\u00eb nj\u00ebjtin automjet, i cili rezultoi n\u00eb pron\u00ebsi t\u00eb v\u00ebllait t\u00eb subjektit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit, p\u00ebr nj\u00eb segment kohor me diferenc\u00eb prej dy dit\u00ebsh\u201d, evidenton Kolegji dhe vler\u00ebson se k\u00ebto rrethana t\u00eb \u00e7ojn\u00eb n\u00eb mospranimin e pretendimit t\u00eb Secit se nuk ka njohje me dhuruesin e shum\u00ebs.<\/p>\n<p>Gjithashtu, trupi gjykues evidenton se Seci, megjith\u00ebse \u00ebsht\u00eb shprehur n\u00eb ankim se po shqyrtonte mund\u00ebsin\u00eb p\u00ebr nj\u00eb kall\u00ebzim n\u00eb prokurori p\u00ebr B. M., k\u00ebt\u00eb e ka realizuar vet\u00ebm pak dit\u00eb p\u00ebrpara fillimit t\u00eb gjykimit t\u00eb \u00e7\u00ebshtjes n\u00eb Kolegj.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Kjo tregon qart\u00ebsisht se subjekti i rivler\u00ebsimit nuk ka dashur q\u00eb kjo \u00e7\u00ebshtje t\u00eb marr\u00eb zgjidhje dhe t\u00eb merret vendim nga prokuroria p\u00ebrpara shqyrtimit t\u00eb \u00e7\u00ebshtjes s\u00eb subjektit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit n\u00eb Kolegj, por t\u00eb dokumentoj\u00eb vet\u00ebm faktin e dor\u00ebzimit t\u00eb kall\u00ebzimit penal p\u00ebr efekt t\u00eb k\u00ebtij procesi, \u00e7ka e b\u00ebn subjektin e rivler\u00ebsimit jobind\u00ebs p\u00ebr q\u00ebndrimet q\u00eb ka mbajtur&#8221;, citohet n\u00eb vendimin e arsyeutar n\u00eb KPA.<\/p>\n<p>Edhe n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb rast, Kolegji arrin n\u00eb konkluzionin se gjyqtari Dritan Seci ka kryer fshehje t\u00eb dhurimit t\u00eb shum\u00ebs 20 mij\u00eb euro.<\/p>\n<p>Nga analiza financiare ka rezultuar se gjyqtari Seci dhe bashk\u00ebshortja e tij kan\u00eb munges\u00eb t\u00eb burimit financiar t\u00eb ligjsh\u00ebm p\u00ebr t\u00eb justifikuar shpenzimet dhe pasurit\u00eb p\u00ebr vitet 2009, 2010, 2011 dhe 2012.<\/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>Kolegji i Posa\u00e7\u00ebm i Apelimit i vler\u00ebson si jo bind\u00ebse dhe n\u00eb kund\u00ebrshtim me provat deklarimet e ish-Kryetarit t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Tropoj\u00ebs, Dritan Seci dhe konkludon se ai ka fshehur nj\u00eb apartament n\u00eb Tiran\u00eb duke u p\u00ebrpjekur t\u00eb manipuloj\u00eb t\u00eb v\u00ebrtet\u00ebn \u2013 si dhe se \u00ebsht\u00eb p\u00ebrpjekur t\u00eb shmangi dh\u00ebnien e shpjegimeve p\u00ebr arsyet q\u00eb [&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":637,"featured_media":73795,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[13,481,114,362],"tags":[620,621,107,112],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/www.reporter.al\/wp-content\/uploads\/20190612_182012_120619011-1_6EeZIxw.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"Trupa gjyq\u00ebsore e KPA-s\u00eb gjat\u00eb nj\u00eb seance publike. ","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/73794"}],"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=73794"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/73794\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":73796,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/73794\/revisions\/73796"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/73795"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=73794"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=73794"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=73794"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}