{"id":75037,"date":"2020-06-17T18:14:29","date_gmt":"2020-06-17T16:14:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/vendimi-i-shkarkimit-prokurori-edmond-hyka-nuk-justifikoi-dhuratat-nga-babai\/2020\/06\/17\/"},"modified":"2023-04-07T03:42:47","modified_gmt":"2023-04-07T01:42:47","slug":"vendimi-i-shkarkimit-prokurori-edmond-hyka-nuk-justifikoi-dhuratat-nga-babai","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/vendimi-i-shkarkimit-prokurori-edmond-hyka-nuk-justifikoi-dhuratat-nga-babai\/2020\/06\/17\/","title":{"rendered":"Vendimi i shkarkimit: Prokurori Edmond Hyka nuk justifikoi dhuratat nga babai"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Prokurori i Apelit t\u00eb Tiran\u00ebs, Edmond Hyka rezultoi me balanca negative t\u00eb vlera t\u00eb konsiderueshme p\u00ebr pasurit\u00eb e tij, nd\u00ebrsa u ngrit\u00ebn pik\u00ebpyetje edhe p\u00ebr nj\u00eb rast t\u00eb konfliktit t\u00eb interesit.<!--more--><\/p>\n<figure id=\"attachment_66881\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-66881\" style=\"width: 600px\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reporter.al\/wp-content\/uploads\/Jordan-Daci-ne-KPK.jpg\"><img decoding=\"async\" loading=\"lazy\" class=\"wp-image-66881 size-large\" src=\"https:\/\/www.reporter.al\/wp-content\/uploads\/Jordan-Daci-ne-KPK-600x400.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"600\" height=\"400\" data-id=\"66881\" \/><\/a><figcaption id=\"caption-attachment-66881\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Avokati i prokurorit Edmond Hyka, Jordan Daci para KPK-s\u00eb. Foto: Edmond Hoxhaj.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p>Prokurori i Apelit t\u00eb Tiran\u00ebs, Edmond Hyka u shkarkua nga detyra m\u00eb 20 dhjetor 2019, pasi Komisioni i Pavarur i Kualifikimit konstatoi munges\u00eb burimesh t\u00eb ligjshme p\u00ebr dhuratat nga prind\u00ebrit n\u00eb shuma t\u00eb m\u00ebdha, blerjen e nj\u00eb apartamenti si dhe investimet n\u00eb bono thesari.<\/p>\n<p>Sipas vendimit t\u00eb arsyetuar t\u00eb Komisionit, prokurori Hyka rezultoi me pasakt\u00ebsi, mosp\u00ebrputhje n\u00eb deklarime dhe deklarim t\u00eb pamjaftuesh\u00ebm t\u00eb pasuris\u00eb nd\u00ebr vite.<\/p>\n<p>Procesi i vetingut p\u00ebr prokurorin e Apelit t\u00eb Tiran\u00ebs u krye nga trupa e drejtuar nga Xhensila Pine, me relator Olsi Komici dhe an\u00ebtare Brunilda Bekteshi. Pokurori Hyka u vler\u00ebsua pozitivisht p\u00ebr past\u00ebrtin\u00eb e figur\u00ebs, nd\u00ebrsa p\u00ebr profesionalizmin mori not\u00eb minimale kualifikuese.<\/p>\n<p>Edmond Hyka ka punuar si avokat n\u00eb periudh\u00ebn 1998-2005 \u2013koh\u00eb nga e cila deklaron t\u00eb ardhura me vler\u00eb 10 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb. Por n\u00eb vendim thuhet se Drejtoria Tatimore Durr\u00ebs nuk ka d\u00ebrguar informacion n\u00eb lidhje me fitimin e realizuar.<\/p>\n<p>P\u00ebr llogaritjen e fitimit, Komisioni \u00ebsht\u00eb bazuar n\u00eb qarkullimin faktik sipas shkres\u00ebs s\u00eb Zyr\u00ebs s\u00eb Tatimeve dhe norm\u00ebn e fitimit p\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb lloj aktiviteti, e cila \u00ebsht\u00eb llogaritur n\u00eb mas\u00ebn 80 %. Qarkullimi i parashikuar \u00ebsht\u00eb vler\u00ebsuar rreth 6 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb; qarkullimi faktik afro 4.2 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb dhe fitimi rreth 3.3 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb.<\/p>\n<p>Trupi gjykues konkludon se Hyka ka dh\u00ebn\u00eb shpjegime t\u00eb mjaftueshme dhe ka provuar me dokumentacion provues ligjor periudh\u00ebn kohore t\u00eb ushtrimit t\u00eb aktivitetit t\u00eb avokatis\u00eb, si dhe faktin se nuk ka detyrime tatimore.<\/p>\n<p>Nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb, n\u00eb vendim shtohet se Hyka nuk ka dh\u00ebn\u00eb shpjegime t\u00eb mjaftueshme dhe nuk ka paraqitur dokumentacion ligjor n\u00eb lidhje me t\u00eb ardhurat deklaruara si t\u00eb p\u00ebrfituara nga aktiviteti si avokat n\u00eb shum\u00ebn 10 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb.<\/p>\n<p>Komisioni nuk merr n\u00eb konsiderat\u00eb deklarimin e Hyk\u00ebs dhe njeh si t\u00eb ardhura t\u00eb ligjshme, shum\u00ebn prej 3,3 milion\u00eb lek\u00ebsh. Gjithashtu, Hyka nuk e ka bindur trupin gjykues p\u00ebr ligjshm\u00ebrin\u00eb e burimit t\u00eb dy vlerave monetare n\u00eb shumat 5 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb dhe 35 mij\u00eb euro t\u00eb trash\u00ebguara nga i ati n\u00eb vitin 2010.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Trash\u00ebgimia nga babai <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Komisioni nuk mori n\u00eb konsiderat\u00eb deklarimet p\u00ebr t\u00eb ardhurat e p\u00ebrfituara nga n\u00ebna e Hyk\u00ebs prej aktivitetit tregtar n\u00eb vitet 1992-1994 dhe t\u00eb ardhurat e deklaruara si t\u00eb p\u00ebrfituara prej saj nga qiradh\u00ebnia e nj\u00eb lokali n\u00eb shum\u00ebn 27 mij\u00eb USD p\u00ebr periudh\u00ebn 1994-1997, pasi nuk jan\u00eb provuar me dokumentacion ligjor.<\/p>\n<p>Nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb p\u00ebrfshir\u00eb n\u00eb analiz\u00ebn financiare edhe vlera e deklaruar si e p\u00ebrfituar nga shitja e nj\u00eb apartamenti me sip\u00ebrfaqe 60 m2 n\u00eb 2011-\u00ebn nga n\u00ebna, pasi Hyka nuk ka arritur t\u00eb depozitoj\u00eb kontrat\u00ebn e shitjes, duke deklaruar se nuk e disponon.<\/p>\n<p>Bazuar n\u00eb t\u00eb ardhurat dhe shpenzimet e prind\u00ebrve t\u00eb prokurorit Hyka, Komisioni konkludon se ata kan\u00eb patur mund\u00ebsi t\u00eb kursenin shum\u00ebn 93 mij\u00eb lek\u00eb dhe se nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb arritur t\u00eb provohet burimi i ligjsh\u00ebm i shum\u00ebs s\u00eb trash\u00ebguar nga babai n\u00eb vler\u00ebn 9.7 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb.<\/p>\n<p>P\u00ebr nj\u00eb depozit\u00eb n\u00eb BKT, dega Durr\u00ebs, n\u00eb llogarin\u00eb \u201cblerje obligacione me afat 7-vje\u00e7ar\u201d, t\u00eb \u00e7elur m\u00eb dat\u00eb 15 shtator 2014 n\u00eb shum\u00ebn 6.1 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb, Hyka ka deklaruar si burim krijimi kursimet e tij dhe t\u00eb familjes.<\/p>\n<p>Kjo shum\u00eb ka si burim t\u00eb deklaruar kursimet prej 3 milion\u00eb lek\u00ebsh n\u00eb vitin 2005. Por analiza financiare p\u00ebr t\u00eb konfirmuar kursimet n\u00eb 30 gusht 2005 ka rezultuar me balanc\u00eb negative prej 2.7 milion\u00eb lek\u00ebsh.<\/p>\n<p>P\u00ebr pasakt\u00ebsit\u00eb n\u00eb deklarim lidhur me burimet e vlerave t\u00eb depozituara n\u00eb 2005-\u00ebn Hyka ka shpjeguar se t\u00eb gjitha t\u00eb ardhurat, p\u00ebrfshi edhe t\u00eb tijat ishin administruar nga babai dhe se ishte e pamundur q\u00eb t\u00eb p\u00ebrcaktohej sakt\u00ebsisht burimi i krijimit t\u00eb secil\u00ebs s\u00eb ardhur, t\u00eb kursimeve t\u00eb prind\u00ebrve, nga shitja e pronave prej tyre apo nga aktiviteti i tij si avokat.<\/p>\n<p>Komisioni konkludon se Hyka nuk ka arritur t\u00eb provoj\u00eb me dokumentacion ligjor burimin e ligjsh\u00ebm t\u00eb depozit\u00ebs dyem\u00ebrore n\u00eb shum\u00ebn 3 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb, e cila ka sh\u00ebrbyer si burim krijimi p\u00ebr investimin n\u00eb bono thesari n\u00eb shum\u00ebn 4.5 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb, nga ku \u00ebsht\u00eb p\u00ebrfituar n\u00eb form\u00ebn e interesave shuma 1.2 milion lek\u00eb.<\/p>\n<p>P\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb arsye, t\u00eb ardhurat e p\u00ebrfituara nga interesi n\u00eb shum\u00ebn 1.2 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb nuk jan\u00eb konsideruar t\u00eb ligjshme nga Komisioni.<\/p>\n<p>Po p\u00ebr t\u00eb nj\u00ebjtin shkak, nuk jan\u00eb konsideruar si burim i ligjsh\u00ebm edhe t\u00eb ardhurat nga interesi i investimeve n\u00eb obligacione n\u00eb shum\u00ebn 6.1 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb gjat\u00eb periudh\u00ebs 2015-2016 q\u00eb kan\u00eb qen\u00eb n\u00eb vler\u00ebn 1 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb.<\/p>\n<p>Prokurori Hyka, sipas Komisionit nuk ka arritur t\u00eb provoj\u00eb edhe burimin e ligjsh\u00ebm t\u00eb 35 mij\u00eb eurove t\u00eb dhuruara nga babai, duke e r\u00ebnduar edhe m\u00eb tej analiz\u00ebn financiare.<\/p>\n<p>P\u00ebrve\u00e7 problemeve me pasurin\u00eb e trash\u00ebguar nga babai, prokurori Edmond Hyka nuk ka arritur t\u00eb dokumentoj\u00eb rreth 32 mij\u00eb euro p\u00ebr blerjen e nj\u00eb apartamenti p\u00ebr t\u00eb birin \u2013me burim 22.883 euro t\u00eb dhuruara nga gjyshja dhe kursimet familjare.<\/p>\n<p>Komisioni konkludon se nuk jan\u00eb provuar disa prej t\u00eb ardhurave nga gjyshja e djalit t\u00eb Hyk\u00ebs, konkretisht ato t\u00eb p\u00ebrfituara prej aktivitetit treg\u00ebtar n\u00eb periudh\u00ebn 1992-1994; nga qiraja n\u00eb vitet 1994-1997 n\u00eb shum\u00ebn 27 mij\u00eb USD dhe nga shitja e apartamentit 60 m2 n\u00eb 2011-\u00ebn.<\/p>\n<p>Trupi gjykues konstaton se, prokurori Hyka nuk ka deklaruar trajtimin preferencial n\u00eb blerjen e nj\u00eb automjeti tip \u201cBenz\u201d nga djali m\u00eb 21 n\u00ebntor 2011, n\u00eb vler\u00ebn 10,200 euro.<\/p>\n<p>Komisioni i ka k\u00ebrkuar shpjegime Hyk\u00ebs n\u00eb lidhje me \u00e7mimin e blerjes s\u00eb k\u00ebtij automjeti nga shit\u00ebsi A.G., i cili 3 dit\u00eb pasi e ka sjell\u00eb n\u00eb Shqip\u00ebri, ia ka shitur me \u00e7mimin q\u00eb e ka bler\u00eb vet\u00eb n\u00eb shum\u00ebn 10,200 euro. Nga hetimi administrativ ka rezultuar se taksa doganore n\u00eb shum\u00ebn 297,674 lek\u00eb dhe shpenzimet e transportit jan\u00eb paguar shit\u00ebsi A.G., q\u00eb sipas Komisionit e ka dal\u00eb me humbje, duke ngritur dyshime p\u00ebr nj\u00eb situat\u00eb trajtimi preferencial ndaj subjektit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit.<\/p>\n<p>Prokurori Edmond Hyka ka deklaruar se nuk e ka ditur se sa i ka kushtuar automjeti personit q\u00eb e shiti, por se e ka bler\u00eb aq sa ishte pasqyruar realisht n\u00eb kontrat\u00eb, n\u00eb shum\u00ebn 10,200 euro, si dhe konsideronte se ky ishte \u00e7mimi i tregut p\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb tip dhe model makine.<\/p>\n<p>Ai ka shtuar se shtetasin A.G. e ka njohur n\u00ebp\u00ebrmjet miqve t\u00eb p\u00ebrbashk\u00ebt p\u00ebrpara vitit 2000 dhe se marr\u00ebdh\u00ebniet me t\u00eb kan\u00eb qen\u00eb normale. Gjithashtu, Hyka ka sqaruar se i ka k\u00ebrkuar vet\u00eb shtetasit A.G. q\u00eb t\u00eb pun\u00ebsoj\u00eb djalin n\u00eb shoq\u00ebrin\u00eb e tij dhe se kan\u00eb ende miq\u00ebsi me nj\u00ebri-tjetrin.<\/p>\n<p>Komisioni nuk ka gjetur ndonj\u00eb situat\u00eb t\u00eb konliktit interesit mes Hyk\u00ebs me shtetasin A.G., por thekson se Hyka nuk ka deklaruar trajtimin preferencial vitin 2011 lidhur me automjetin e sip\u00ebrcituar.<\/p>\n<p>Komisioni konstaton se Hyka ka bler\u00eb nj\u00eb apartament me sip\u00ebrfaqe 121 m2 n\u00eb vler\u00ebn 2 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb dhe nj\u00eb dyqan 52.50 m2 n\u00eb shum\u00ebn 500 mij\u00eb lek\u00eb n\u00eb Durr\u00ebs n\u00eb vitin 2005, me \u00e7mim disa her\u00eb m\u00eb t\u00eb ul\u00ebt nga vlera reale dhe ngre dyshime p\u00ebr trajtim preferencial.<\/p>\n<p>Komisioni ka analizuar \u00e7mimin e pasqyruar n\u00eb kontrat\u00ebn e shitblerjes n\u00eb shum\u00ebn prej 2 milion\u00eb lek\u00ebsh dhe e ka krahasuar me \u00e7mimet referuese t\u00eb Entit Komb\u00ebtar t\u00eb Banesave, EKB p\u00ebr vitin 2005, prej nga ka rezultuar se vlera reale e k\u00ebsaj pasurie ka qen\u00eb 6.5 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb.<\/p>\n<p>Gjithashtu evidentohet se edhe \u00e7mimi i blerjes s\u00eb dyqanit duket mjaft i ul\u00ebt po t\u00eb krahasohet me \u00e7mimin referues t\u00eb EKB p\u00ebr at\u00eb vit.<\/p>\n<p>Komisioni i ka k\u00ebrkuar shpjegime Hyk\u00ebs n\u00eb lidhje me shit\u00ebsit e apartamentit I. dhe V.\u00c7., se n\u00eb \u00e7far\u00eb rrethanash \u00ebsht\u00eb njohur dhe n\u00ebse ka miq\u00ebsi me ta. Ai ka shpjeguar se kur ka punuar si avokat, ka njohur shtetasin I.\u00c7., nd\u00ebrsa shtetasen V.\u00c7. nuk e njeh.<\/p>\n<p>Prokuroria e Apelit Tiran\u00eb ka konfirmuar se pran\u00eb saj jan\u00eb trajtuar nj\u00eb \u00e7\u00ebshtje penale, ku pal\u00eb n\u00eb gjykim ka qen\u00eb shtetasi I.\u00c7., n\u00eb cil\u00ebsin\u00eb e k\u00ebrkuesit, me objekt gjykimi kund\u00ebrshtimin e vendim pushimi t\u00eb procedimit penal t\u00eb vitit 2011 t\u00eb Prokuroris\u00eb s\u00eb Rrethit Gjyq\u00ebsor Tiran\u00eb. Kjo \u00e7\u00ebshtje ka rezultuar se \u00ebsht\u00eb p\u00ebrfaq\u00ebsuar nga prokuror Edmond Hyka me dat\u00eb 20 mars 2018, n\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebn e Apelit Tiran\u00eb.<\/p>\n<p>Nga analiza financiare kan\u00eb rezultuar me balanca negative disa vite:\u00a0 n\u00eb vitin 2005 me vler\u00eb 2.7 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb; n\u00eb vitin 2007 n\u00eb shum\u00ebn 486 mij\u00eb lek\u00eb; n\u00eb 2009-\u00ebn n\u00eb vler\u00ebn 8.2 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb; n\u00eb vitin 2011 n\u00eb shum\u00ebn 117 mij\u00eb lek\u00eb dhe n\u00eb 2014-\u00ebn, 20 mij\u00eb lek\u00eb.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Vler\u00ebsim minimal n\u00eb profesionaliz\u00ebm<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Komisioni identifikoi mang\u00ebsi dhe problematika n\u00eb aspektin procedurial nga ana e prokuroit Hyka si edhe nj\u00eb nj\u00eb situat\u00eb konflikti interesi, por nuk i klasifikon ato si shkarkuese. Lidhur me k\u00ebt\u00eb kriter, KPK vler\u00ebson se Hyka arrin nivel minimal kualifikues n\u00eb vler\u00ebsimin e aft\u00ebsive profesionale.<\/p>\n<p>N\u00eb vendim thuhet se Hyka \u00ebsht\u00eb shortuar p\u00ebr t\u00eb p\u00ebrfaq\u00ebsuar n\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebn e Apelit nj\u00eb \u00e7\u00ebshtje penale, ku ka pasur cil\u00ebsin\u00eb e pal\u00ebs n\u00eb gjykim shtetasi I.\u00c7., nga i cili ka bler\u00eb apartamentin n\u00eb vler\u00ebn 2 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb n\u00eb vitin 2002 n\u00eb Durr\u00ebs.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cSubjekti ka konfirmuar marr\u00ebdh\u00ebnien e vazhdueshme me shtetasin I.\u00c7. q\u00eb nga viti 2002 dhe n\u00eb deri n\u00eb vitin 2005\u201d, citohet n\u00eb vendim.<\/p>\n<p>Sipas Komisionit duket se Hyka \u00ebsht\u00eb trajtuar n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb preferenciale nga I.\u00c7. n\u00eb lidhje me \u00e7mimin e blerjes s\u00eb apartamentit, pasi i \u00ebsht\u00eb shitur subjektit 3-fish m\u00eb lir\u00eb se \u00e7mimi referues ligjor. Shpjegimet e prokurorit Hyka se \u00e7\u00ebshtja n\u00eb fjal\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb shqyrtuar n\u00eb dhom\u00eb k\u00ebshillimi ku ai nuk mund t\u00eb marr\u00eb pjes\u00eb si edhe fakti se Gjykata e Apelit e ka rr\u00ebzuar k\u00ebrkes\u00ebn e I.\u00c7., nuk kan\u00eb qen\u00eb bind\u00ebse p\u00ebr Komisionin.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cPavar\u00ebsisht pretendimit q\u00eb ngre subjekti, q\u00eb roli i tij ka qen\u00eb pothuaj i zbehur dhe gjykata ka vendosur n\u00eb disfavor t\u00eb tij, praktika juridike nuk e lidh k\u00ebt\u00eb fakt me ushtrimin e ndikimit ose jo, apo me q\u00ebndrimin pro apo kund\u00ebr t\u00eb subjektit ndaj pal\u00ebs me t\u00eb cil\u00ebn ka pasur nj\u00eb marr\u00ebdh\u00ebnie, por rezulton se vet\u00ebm fakti i q\u00ebnies pjes\u00eb e nj\u00eb procesi me nj\u00eb pal\u00eb ku ka ekzistuar nj\u00eb marr\u00ebdh\u00ebnie, n\u00eb rastin konkret interesi, kjo do t\u00eb ishte e mjaftueshme q\u00eb subjekti n\u00eb zbatim t\u00eb ligjit, t\u00eb jepte dor\u00ebheqjen,\u201d thuhet n\u00eb vendim.<\/p>\n<p>Komisioni identifikoi probleme edhe lidhur me nj\u00eb denoncim se Hyka ka k\u00ebrkuar ndryshimin e vendimit t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Shkall\u00ebs s\u00eb Par\u00eb nga masa e sigurimit \u201carrest n\u00eb burg\u201d n\u00eb \u201carrest n\u00eb sht\u00ebpi\u201d p\u00ebr shtetasin F.Ll., i akuzuar p\u00ebr vjedhje.<\/p>\n<p>Hyka e ka mb\u00ebshtetur q\u00ebndrimin e tij leht\u00ebsues n\u00eb nj\u00eb deklarat\u00eb noteriale, sipas s\u00eb cil\u00ebs zbehej pozicioni i t\u00eb pandehurit n\u00eb kryerjen e vepr\u00ebs penale.<\/p>\n<p>Komisioni vler\u00ebson se prokurori Hyka nuk ka respektuar si duhet dispozitat e Kodit t\u00eb Procedur\u00ebs Penale, duke mos b\u00ebr\u00eb nj\u00eb vler\u00ebsim dhe nj\u00eb analiz\u00eb t\u00eb thell\u00eb dhe t\u00eb drejt\u00eb t\u00eb kritereve ligjore, gj\u00eb q\u00eb ka \u00e7uar n\u00eb nj\u00eb q\u00ebndrim jo t\u00eb drejt\u00eb n\u00eb k\u00ebrkes\u00ebn e tij p\u00ebr ndryshimin e mas\u00ebs s\u00eb sigurimit personal, nga masa \u201carrest me burg\u201d n\u00eb \u201carrest sht\u00ebpie\u201d p\u00ebr t\u00eb pandehurin F.Ll.<\/p>\n<p>Hyka \u00ebsht\u00eb vler\u00ebsuar pozitivisht p\u00ebr kriterin e past\u00ebrtis\u00eb s\u00eb figur\u00ebs.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/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>Prokurori i Apelit t\u00eb Tiran\u00ebs, Edmond Hyka rezultoi me balanca negative t\u00eb vlera t\u00eb konsiderueshme p\u00ebr pasurit\u00eb e tij, nd\u00ebrsa u ngrit\u00ebn pik\u00ebpyetje edhe p\u00ebr nj\u00eb rast t\u00eb konfliktit t\u00eb interesit.<!-- 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":75038,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[13,415,117,473],"tags":[118,119,228],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/www.reporter.al\/wp-content\/uploads\/Jordan-Daci-ne-KPK.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"Avokati i prokurorit Edmond Hyka, Jordan Daci para KPK-s\u00eb. Foto: Edmond Hoxhaj. ","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/75037"}],"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=75037"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/75037\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":75039,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/75037\/revisions\/75039"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/75038"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=75037"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=75037"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=75037"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}