{"id":75388,"date":"2020-02-12T18:46:31","date_gmt":"2020-02-12T17:46:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/fatos-qato-u-shkarkua-per-mosdeklarim-dhe-mungese-burimesh-financiare\/2020\/02\/12\/"},"modified":"2023-04-07T04:33:45","modified_gmt":"2023-04-07T02:33:45","slug":"fatos-qato-u-shkarkua-per-mosdeklarim-dhe-mungese-burimesh-financiare","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/fatos-qato-u-shkarkua-per-mosdeklarim-dhe-mungese-burimesh-financiare\/2020\/02\/12\/","title":{"rendered":"Fatos Qato u shkarkua p\u00ebr mosdeklarim dhe munges\u00eb burimesh financiare"},"content":{"rendered":"

Kolegji i Posa\u00e7\u00ebm i Apelimit rr\u00ebzoi pretendimet e ish-gjyqtarit Fatos Qato mbi analizat financiare t\u00eb Komisionit t\u00eb Pavarur t\u00eb Kualifikimit, nd\u00ebrsa gjeti q\u00ebndrimet e tij kontradiktore.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
Gjyqtari Fatos Qato dhe avokati i tij, Julian M\u00ebrtiri para Komisionit t\u00eb Pavarur t\u00eb Kualifikimit.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Pretendimet e ish-gjyqtarit Fatos Qato se Komisioni i Pavarur i Kualifikimit nuk i kishte llogaritur sakt\u00ebsisht t\u00eb ardhurat e tij dhe nuk kishte marr\u00eb parasysh kursimet n\u00eb vite apo disa t\u00eb ardhura nga qiradh\u00ebnia dhe dhuratat prej miqve.<\/p>\n

Por Kolegji i Posa\u00e7\u00ebm i Apelimit gjeti se arsyetimet e KPK ishin t\u00eb sakta dhe se megjith\u00eb nj\u00eb s\u00ebr\u00eb l\u00ebshimesh n\u00eb analizat financiare Qato nuk arrinte t\u00eb provonte pasjen e burimeve t\u00eb ligjshme p\u00ebr pasurit\u00eb e deklaruara. Qato po ashtu u penalizua p\u00ebr mosdeklarimin e dhurimeve nga miqt\u00eb p\u00ebr kurimin jasht\u00eb vendit.<\/p>\n

Trupa q\u00eb gjykoi Qaton, e kryesuar nga Ina Rama, me relatore Natasha Mulaj dhe an\u00ebtar\u00eb Ardian Hajdari, Luan Daci e Rezarta Schuetz, arriti n\u00eb p\u00ebrfundimin se ish-gjyqtari nuk kishte pasur burime t\u00eb mjaftueshme p\u00ebr t\u00eb bler\u00eb nj\u00eb apartament 141 metra katror\u00eb n\u00eb vitin 1998, \u00a0nj\u00eb tok\u00eb prej 410 metrash dhe munges\u00eb burimesh finaciare.<\/p>\n

Sipas vendimit t\u00eb zbardhur t\u00eb Kolegjit, Qato kishte ankimuar vendimin e KPK p\u00ebr procedur\u00ebn, p\u00ebr llogaritje t\u00eb gabuar t\u00eb t\u00eb ardhurave dhe shpenzimeve t\u00eb tij dhe p\u00ebr mosmarrje parasysh t\u00eb dhurimeve nga t\u00eb af\u00ebrm.<\/p>\n

Qato i cili kishte filluar pun\u00eb n\u00eb sistemin e drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb n\u00eb vitin 1986 si hetues n\u00eb Hetuesin\u00eb e Tiran\u00ebs dhe p\u00ebr m\u00eb shum\u00eb se 15 vjet ishte gjykat\u00ebs i Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Apelit t\u00eb Tiran\u00ebs, u shkarkua nga Komisioni n\u00eb dhjetor t\u00eb vitit 2018. Vendimi u la n\u00eb fuqi edhe nga KPA.<\/p>\n

Rr\u00ebzimi i pretendimeve n\u00eb procedur\u00eb<\/strong><\/p>\n

Qato, ngjash\u00ebm me shumic\u00ebn e magjistrat\u00ebve t\u00eb shkarkuar nga Komisioni vet\u00ebm n\u00eb j\u00eb kriter, apeloi n\u00eb KPA se kjo formul\u00eb ishte e paligjshme dhe se ai i duhej t\u2019i ishte n\u00ebnshtruar hetimit n\u00eb t\u00eb tre kriteret. Ai po ashtu pretendoi se KPK nuk mund t\u00eb dilte me p\u00ebrfundimin p\u00ebr \u201cdeklarim t\u00eb pamjaftuesh\u00ebm\u201d duke u bazuar vet\u00ebm n\u00eb kriterin e pasuris\u00eb.<\/p>\n

Qato ankimoi po ashtu m\u00ebnyr\u00ebn se si kishte arsyetuar Komisioni mbi vler\u00ebn e deklaratave t\u00eb pasuris\u00eb n\u00eb vite, nd\u00ebrsa pretendoi se derisa nuk p\u00ebrmbushej kushti i ligjor i deklarimit t\u00eb \u201cdyfishit t\u00eb pasuris\u00eb s\u00eb ligjshme\u201d, shkarkimi i tij nuk ishte i drejt\u00eb.<\/p>\n

Kolegji i rr\u00ebzoi k\u00ebto pretendime duke arsyetuar kryesisht mbi t\u00eb drejt\u00ebn e KPK p\u00ebr t\u00eb vendosur vet\u00ebm mbi nj\u00eb kriter dhe po ashtu ritheksoi arsyetimet e m\u00ebparshme mbi faktin se deklaratat e pasuris\u00eb n\u00eb vite dhe ajo veting nuk kishin vler\u00eb t\u00eb ndryshme sipas Kushtetut\u00ebs.<\/p>\n

KPA ritheksoi se nuk ishte e nevojshme gjetja e shkeljeve n\u00eb m\u00eb shum\u00eb se nj\u00eb kriter p\u00ebr t\u00eb arritur n\u00eb vendimin e shkarkimit, nd\u00ebrsa ritheksoi se n\u00eb rastin e \u201cdeklarimit t\u00eb\u00a0 pamjaftuesh\u00ebm\u201d nuk ishte e nevojshme t\u00eb provohej pasja e dyfishit t\u00eb pasuris\u00eb mbi at\u00eb q\u00eb mund t\u00eb dokumentohej me t\u00eb ardhura t\u00eb ligjshme.<\/p>\n

Rr\u00ebzimi i pretendimeve mbi pasurin\u00eb<\/strong><\/p>\n

Vendimi i Kolegjit qart\u00ebson se mjaft prej shpjegimeve t\u00eb dh\u00ebna nga Qato kan\u00eb qen\u00eb kontraverse me nj\u00ebra tjetr\u00ebn. KPA n\u00eb analiz\u00eb t\u00eb pretendimeve t\u00eb tij mbi mobilimin e sht\u00ebpis\u00eb dhe p\u00ebrdorimit t\u00eb kursimeve t\u00eb \u00e7do vit p\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb, gjeti se po ashtu subjekti pretendonte q\u00eb k\u00ebto kursime mund t\u00eb mbulonin vitet me diferenca negative.<\/p>\n

\u201cN\u00eb vitet q\u00eb rezultojn\u00eb me gjendje negative, teprica e \u00e7do viti ushtrimor duhet t\u2019i shtohet vitit pasues negativ dhe diferenca progresive \u00ebsht\u00eb periodikisht pozitive, \u00e7far\u00eb tregon se \u00e7do vit ekzistojn\u00eb burime t\u00eb mjaftueshme financiare. Komisioni ka gabuar kur merr n\u00eb konsiderat\u00eb vet\u00ebm vlerat negative t\u00eb viteve, nd\u00ebrsa t\u00eb gjitha vitet e tjera q\u00eb jan\u00eb me vlera pozitive, i zeron\u201d, citohet n\u00eb vendim pretendimi i Qatos.<\/p>\n

Por KPA vler\u00ebson se k\u00ebto pretendimi mbinin ndesh me vet\u00eb deklaratat e ish-gjyqtarit se k\u00ebto kursime ishin p\u00ebrdorur p\u00ebr t\u00eb b\u00ebr\u00eb mobilimin n\u00eb vite. Kolegji arsyetoi se vendimi i Komisionit ishte i drejt\u00eb, se tepricat e pretenduara ishin p\u00ebrdorur si\u00e7 vet\u00eb Qato kishte deklaruar dhe se ato nuk mund t\u00eb mbulonin diferencat negative n\u00eb vite.<\/p>\n

Kolegji pasi i p\u00ebrcaktoi si t\u00eb paligjshme dhurimet e pretendura pasi nuk ishin deklaruar n\u00eb vitin kur ishin marr\u00eb dhe se n\u00eb at\u00eb koh\u00eb nuk ishin deklaruar as shpenzimet spitalore t\u00eb kryera prej Qatos, argumentoi se edhe n\u00ebse kjo do t\u00eb ndryshohej bilanci do t\u00eb ishte negativ. \u201cPasi u mor\u00ebn n\u00eb konsiderat\u00eb pretendimet e subjektit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit, edhe pse u p\u00ebrllogarit\u00ebn n\u00eb z\u00ebrin \u201ct\u00eb ardhura\u201d dhurimet e pretenduara, p\u00ebrs\u00ebri u konstatua mungesa e t\u00eb ardhurave nga burime financiare t\u00eb ligjshme n\u00eb vler\u00ebn 2.171.407 lek\u00eb\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendim.<\/p>\n

Po ashtu KPA rr\u00ebzoi pretendimet p\u00ebr krusime t\u00eb realizuar para vitit 2002 dhe t\u00eb pretenduara nga subjekti q\u00eb ishin p\u00ebrdorur n\u00eb vitet pasardh\u00ebse. \u201cKolegjit vler\u00ebson se Komisioni me t\u00eb drejt\u00eb nuk i ka marr\u00eb n\u00eb konsiderat\u00eb kursimet e mundshme t\u00eb pretenduara m\u00eb sip\u00ebr p\u00ebr periudh\u00ebn 1999-2002, duke qen\u00eb se subjekti i rivler\u00ebsimit nuk ka deklaruar kursime n\u00eb deklarat\u00ebn e par\u00eb t\u00eb interesave privat\u00eb p\u00ebr vitin 2003\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendim.<\/p>\n

KPA nd\u00ebr t\u00eb tjera vuri n\u00eb dukje se nj\u00eb s\u00ebr\u00eb shpenzimesh t\u00eb deklaruara nga subjekti, p\u00ebrfshi ato p\u00ebr shkollimin e f\u00ebmij\u00ebve, nuk justifikoheshin me t\u00eb ardhurat e tij dhe familjes. Po ashtu Kolegji vler\u00ebsoi si t\u00eb paligjshme t\u00eb ardhura t\u00eb pretenduara nga qiraja, pasi gjeti se p\u00ebr k\u00ebto nuk provohej pagesa e tatimeve. Po ashtu sipas Kolegjit n\u00eb dokumentet e paraqitura prej subjektit kishte ndryshim t\u00eb emrit t\u00eb qiramarr\u00ebsit.<\/p>\n

Ngjashm\u00ebrisht t\u00eb paligjshme u cil\u00ebsuan t\u00eb ardhurat nga qiraja p\u00ebr apartamentin. \u201cN\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb z\u00eb t\u00eb analiz\u00ebs financiare nuk jan\u00eb p\u00ebrfshir\u00eb t\u00eb ardhurat e deklaruara n\u00eb deklaratat e interesave privat\u00eb periodik\u00eb vjetor\u00eb, t\u00eb p\u00ebrfituara nga dh\u00ebnia me qira e apartamentit n\u00eb rr. \u201c{***}\u201d p\u00ebr vitet 2007 dhe 2012-2014, n\u00eb kushtet kur nga organet tatimore \u00ebsht\u00eb konfirmuar se nuk ishte paguar tatimi mbi t\u00eb ardhurat e realizuara nga qiraja n\u00eb k\u00ebto vite. K\u00ebto t\u00eb ardhura konsiderohen t\u00eb paligjshme n\u00eb kuptim t\u00eb nenit D, pika 3 e Aneksit t\u00eb Kushtetut\u00ebs\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendim.<\/p>\n

Kolegji b\u00ebn me dije n\u00eb arsyetim se n\u00eb disa raste edhe pse ishin pranuar pretendimet e Qatos kjo nuk kishte ndryshuar analiz\u00eb financiare dhe se mbi k\u00ebt\u00eb t\u00eb fundit r\u00ebndonin nd\u00ebr t\u00eb tjera edhe nj\u00eb s\u00ebr\u00eb mosdeklarimesh t\u00eb t\u00eb ardhurave dhe mosdeklarim i qart\u00eb i likujditeteve n\u00eb cash. N\u00eb fund Kolegji arsyetoi l\u00ebnien n\u00eb fuqi t\u00eb vendimit t\u00eb KPK, duke shkarkuar p\u00ebrfundimisht Qaton p\u00ebr deklarim t\u00eb pamjaftuesh\u00ebm t\u00eb pasuris\u00eb.<\/p>\n

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

Kolegji i Posa\u00e7\u00ebm i Apelimit rr\u00ebzoi pretendimet e ish-gjyqtarit Fatos Qato mbi analizat financiare t\u00eb Komisionit t\u00eb Pavarur t\u00eb Kualifikimit, nd\u00ebrsa gjeti q\u00ebndrimet e tij kontradiktore.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":97,"featured_media":75389,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[13,204,114,473],"tags":[757,125,107,112,221],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/www.reporter.al\/wp-content\/uploads\/Qato-dhe-avokati-i-tij.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"Gjyqtari Fatos Qato dhe avokati i tij, Julian M\u00ebrtiri para Komisionit t\u00eb Pavarur t\u00eb Kualifikimit. ","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/75388"}],"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=75388"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/75388\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":75390,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/75388\/revisions\/75390"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/75389"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=75388"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=75388"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=75388"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}