{"id":76023,"date":"2019-05-01T11:29:02","date_gmt":"2019-05-01T09:29:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/vendimi-i-kolegjit-per-sevdarin-arrin-nivelin-e-besueshmerise-por-jo-ate-te-bindjes\/2019\/05\/01\/"},"modified":"2023-04-07T12:10:18","modified_gmt":"2023-04-07T10:10:18","slug":"vendimi-i-kolegjit-per-sevdarin-arrin-nivelin-e-besueshmerise-por-jo-ate-te-bindjes","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/vendimi-i-kolegjit-per-sevdarin-arrin-nivelin-e-besueshmerise-por-jo-ate-te-bindjes\/2019\/05\/01\/","title":{"rendered":"Vendimi i Kolegjit p\u00ebr Sevdarin: Arrin nivelin e besueshm\u00ebris\u00eb, por jo at\u00eb t\u00eb bindjes"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Kolegji vendosi 4 me 1 p\u00ebr shkarkimin e Antoneta Sevdarit, duke arsyetuar se megjith\u00ebse kishte t\u00eb dh\u00ebna t\u00eb pun\u00ebsimit t\u00eb bashk\u00ebshortit n\u00eb Greqi dhe Arabin\u00eb Saudite, mosv\u00ebrtetimi i pagimit t\u00eb tatimeve p\u00ebr t\u00eb ardhurat e siguruara jasht\u00eb vendit e penalizonin subjektin. \u00a0<!--more--><\/p>\n<figure id=\"attachment_56282\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-56282\" style=\"width: 533px\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reporter.al\/wp-content\/uploads\/sevdari.jpg\"><img decoding=\"async\" loading=\"lazy\" class=\"size-large wp-image-56282\" src=\"https:\/\/www.reporter.al\/wp-content\/uploads\/sevdari-533x400.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"533\" height=\"400\" data-id=\"56282\" \/><\/a><figcaption id=\"caption-attachment-56282\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">KPA gjate shqyrtimit te ankimin ndaj prokurores Antoneta Sevdari | Foto : LSA<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p>N\u00eb nj\u00eb vendim me argumente dhe kund\u00ebrargumente kryesisht mbi legjislacionin mbi tatimet, shumica n\u00eb Kolegjin e Posa\u00e7\u00ebm t\u00eb Apelimit pranon n\u00eb nj\u00eb moment, se provat e sjella nga ish-prokurorja p\u00ebr pun\u00ebn e bashk\u00ebshortit si gjeodez n\u00eb Arabin\u00eb Saudite \u201carrinin nivel besueshm\u00ebrie\u201d. Kolegji megjithat\u00eb aty p\u00ebr aty, e rr\u00ebzon k\u00ebt\u00eb q\u00ebndim duke hapur kllapat dhe shtuar \u201cpor jo at\u00eb t\u00eb bindjes\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>Shkarkimi i Antoneta Sevdarit, e cila ishte zgjedhur si an\u00ebtare e K\u00ebshillit t\u00eb Lart\u00eb t\u00eb Prokuroris\u00eb pasi kishte kaluar shkall\u00ebn e par\u00eb t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit pran\u00eb Komisionit t\u00eb Pavarur t\u00eb Kualifikimit, \u00ebsht\u00eb bazuar kryesisht mbi legjislacionin p\u00ebr tatimet.<\/p>\n<p>Shumica n\u00eb KPA p\u00ebrfshi relatorin Sokol \u00c7omo, kryesuesin Luan Daci an\u00ebtar\u00ebt Ardian Hajdari dhe Rezarta Schuetz, arsyetojn\u00eb n\u00eb vendimin e zbardhur se Sevdari b\u00ebri deklarim t\u00eb pamjaftuesh\u00ebm n\u00eb kriterin e pasuris\u00eb, sa koh\u00eb ajo nuk provoi pagimin e tatimeve p\u00ebr t\u00eb ardhurat q\u00eb bashk\u00ebshorti kishte fituar si i pun\u00ebsuar n\u00eb Greqi dhe Arabin\u00eb Saudite.<\/p>\n<p>Po ashtu shumica, nd\u00ebrsa pranoi se n\u00eb t\u00ebr\u00ebsi Sevdari rezultonte e aft\u00eb profesionalisht, arsyetoi se ajo kishte \u201cc\u00ebnuar besimin e publikut te drejt\u00ebsia\u201d, duke mos kund\u00ebrshtuar n\u00eb apel nj\u00eb vendim gjykate.<\/p>\n<p>Sipas shumic\u00ebs n\u00eb KPA, humbja e afateve t\u00eb apelimit \u201ctregon d\u00ebshtim t\u00eb organit t\u00eb prokuroris\u00eb p\u00ebr t\u00eb \u00e7uar deri n\u00eb fund ndjekjen penale ndaj zyrtar\u00ebve publik\u00eb<strong>,<\/strong> t\u00eb cil\u00ebt kan\u00eb probleme ligjore me deklarimin dhe fshehjen e pasuris\u00eb dhe cenon besimin e publikut te sistemi i drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>N\u00eb pakic\u00eb, Ina Rama arsyetoi se Sevdari kishte provuar burimin e ligjsh\u00ebm t\u00eb t\u00eb ardhurave t\u00eb bashk\u00ebshortit dhe se megjith\u00ebse nuk mund t\u00eb provonte pagimin e tatimeve, ky nuk mund t\u00eb ishte shkak p\u00ebr shkarkimin.<\/p>\n<p>Rama po ashtu arsyeton se shumica doli nga objekti i gjykimit dhe kreu shkelje proceduriale p\u00ebr t\u00eb arsyetuar se Sevdari kishte \u201cc\u00ebnuar besimin e publikut te drejt\u00ebsia\u201d. Rama arsyetoi se q\u00ebndrimi i mbajtur nga Kolegji n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb pik\u00eb, \u201c\u00ebsht\u00eb i padrejt\u00eb jo vet\u00ebm p\u00ebr shkak t\u00eb mosrespektimit t\u00eb normave procedurale q\u00eb garantojn\u00eb procesin e rregullt, por edhe n\u00eb thelbin e tij\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>Antoneta Sevdari e ka filluar karrier\u00ebn si prokurore n\u00eb Prokurorin\u00eb e Rrethit Gjyq\u00ebsor Durr\u00ebs n\u00eb vitin 2002 dhe n\u00eb vitin 2013 ajo \u00ebsht\u00eb transferuar n\u00eb Prokurorin\u00eb e Rrethit Gjyq\u00ebsor Tiran\u00eb, ku ka qen\u00eb pjes\u00eb e task-forc\u00ebs kund\u00ebr krimit ekonomik dhe korrupsionit.<\/p>\n<p>Ajo u konfirmua n\u00eb detyr\u00eb nga KPK me 18 korrik, por vendimi u apelua n\u00eb gusht 2018 nga Komisioneri Publik. Sevdari njihet p\u00ebr pun\u00ebn e saj n\u00eb prokurorin\u00eb e Tiran\u00ebs p\u00ebr procedimin e \u00e7\u00ebshtjes CEZ-DIA kund\u00ebr biznesmenit, Kastriot Ismailaj \u2013 i d\u00ebnuar me 11 vjet burg p\u00ebr nj\u00eb nga rastet m\u00eb t\u00eb r\u00ebnda t\u00eb mashtrimit dhe korrupsionit n\u00eb Shqip\u00ebrin\u00eb e tranzicionit.<\/p>\n<p>Para se KPA t\u00eb fillonte shqyrtimin e \u00e7\u00ebshtjes, Sevdari u zgjodh si an\u00ebtare e K\u00ebshillit t\u00eb Lart\u00eb t\u00eb Prokuroris\u00eb (KLP). Pas shkarkimit t\u00eb saj, n\u00eb vendin e mbetur vakant u zgjodh prokurori i Shkodr\u00ebs Vat\u00eb Staka.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Arsyetimi i shumic\u00ebs<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Nd\u00ebrsa ka rr\u00ebzuar pretendimet e Komisionerit p\u00ebr disa prej pikave t\u00eb ankimit, p\u00ebrfshi at\u00eb t\u00eb pasakt\u00ebsis\u00eb n\u00eb deklarim dhe pagimin e detyrimeve tatimore nga bashk\u00ebshorti i Sevdarit p\u00ebr pun\u00ebn n\u00eb Shqip\u00ebri p\u00ebr dy vite, shumica n\u00eb Kolegj ka arsyetuar se nuk mund t\u00eb konsideronte t\u00eb ardhura t\u00eb ligjshme t\u00eb ardhurat e bashk\u00ebshortit t\u00eb ish-prokurores nga puna n\u00eb Greqi dhe n\u00eb Arabin\u00eb Saudite.<\/p>\n<p>Nga vendimi i zbardhur rezulton se \u00e7\u00ebshtja u fokusua n\u00eb \u201cVerifikimin e ligjshm\u00ebris\u00eb s\u00eb shum\u00ebs prej 3.000.000 lek\u00ebsh (p\u00ebrfshir\u00eb shum\u00ebn prej 12.000 eurosh, t\u00eb siguruar nga puna e bashk\u00ebshortit t\u00eb subjektit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit n\u00eb Arabin\u00eb Saudite)\u201d dhe \u201cVerifikimi i ligjshm\u00ebris\u00eb s\u00eb shum\u00ebs prej 19.975,23 USD, t\u00eb deklaruar nga subjekti i rivler\u00ebsimit n\u00eb vitin 2006\u201d, po si e ardhur nga puna n\u00eb Arabin\u00eb Saudite.<\/p>\n<p>Si\u00e7 rezulton nga vendimi i zbardhur i KPA, Sevdari pretendoi se \u201ck\u00ebto t\u00eb ardhura provohen tej \u00e7do dyshimi t\u00eb arsyesh\u00ebm q\u00eb jan\u00eb t\u00eb ardhura t\u00eb realizuara nga personi i lidhur, \u201csi rezultat i nj\u00eb pune t\u00eb ligjshme dhe t\u00eb ndershme\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>Po ashtu ajo pretendoi pamund\u00ebsi \u201cp\u00ebr t\u00eb shpjeguar dhe dokumentuar k\u00ebt\u00eb fakt, pavar\u00ebsisht p\u00ebrpjekjeve t\u00eb mundshme n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb drejtim\u201d, p\u00ebr shkak t\u00eb koh\u00ebs dhe p\u00ebr shkak t\u00eb pamund\u00ebsis\u00eb p\u00ebr t\u00eb gjetur dokumente.<\/p>\n<p>KPA fillimisht rr\u00ebzoi Sevdarin sa i p\u00ebrket koh\u00ebs n\u00eb t\u00eb cil\u00ebn duhej bazuar rivler\u00ebsimi i pasuris\u00eb. Prokurorja e shkarkuar pretendoi se nuk duhej t\u00eb arsyetonte mbi pasurin\u00eb q\u00eb kishte b\u00ebr\u00eb i shoqi para lidhjes n\u00eb martes\u00eb dhe para fillimit t\u00eb pun\u00ebs s\u00eb saj si magjistrate.<\/p>\n<p>Kolegji e rr\u00ebzoi k\u00ebt\u00eb pik\u00eb duke arsyetuar se ligji \u201cnuk parashikonte ndonj\u00eb norm\u00eb juridike, sipas s\u00eb cil\u00ebs t\u00eb vendosen kritere vler\u00ebsimi, lidhur me pasurit\u00eb e subjekteve dhe personave t\u00eb lidhur, me q\u00ebllim p\u00ebrfshirjen apo p\u00ebrjashtimin e tyre nga objekti i kontrollit t\u00eb organeve t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit\u201d. Po ashtu sipas KPA ligji \u201ck\u00ebrkon kontrollin e plot\u00eb t\u00eb pasurive t\u00eb deklaruara, qofshin k\u00ebto t\u00eb krijuara para apo pas em\u00ebrimit n\u00eb detyr\u00eb t\u00eb magjistratit\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>M\u00eb tej shumica prej kat\u00ebr an\u00ebtar\u00ebsh arsyetoi se megjith\u00eb dokumentacionin e sjell\u00eb nga Sevdari, ajo nuk provoi burimin e ligjsh\u00ebm t\u00eb t\u00eb ardhurave t\u00eb t\u00eb shoqit nga emigracioni n\u00eb Greqi. \u201cS\u00eb pari, sa u takon t\u00eb ardhurave me burim emigracionin, trupi gjykues mban parasysh q\u00ebndrimin e Kolegjit n\u00eb nj\u00eb vendimmarrje t\u00eb m\u00ebparshme, sipas s\u00eb cil\u00ebs jo gjithmon\u00eb remitancat mund t\u00eb konsistojn\u00eb n\u00eb d\u00ebrgesa t\u00eb vlerave monetare t\u00eb krijuara nga burime t\u00eb ligjshme\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendim.<\/p>\n<p>Sipas shumic\u00ebs \u201csubjekti i rivler\u00ebsimit arriti t\u00eb provoj\u00eb faktin q\u00eb bashk\u00ebshorti i saj ka qen\u00eb emigrant ekonomik n\u00eb Greqi, n\u00eb periudh\u00ebn shtator 1997 deri n\u00eb prill 2000\u201d, por jo t\u00eb ardhurat e p\u00ebrfituara dhe as se si k\u00ebto kishin ardhur n\u00eb Shqip\u00ebri apo n\u00ebse p\u00ebr to ishte paguar tatim.<\/p>\n<p>Shumica arsyetoi se Sevdari nuk arriti t\u00eb shpjegoj\u00eb se sa ishte vlera e t\u00eb ardhurave t\u00eb d\u00ebrguara n\u00eb Shqip\u00ebri nga bashk\u00ebshorti n\u00eb form\u00ebn e remitanc\u00ebs, gj\u00eb q\u00eb sipas tyre b\u00ebri t\u00eb pamundur p\u00ebr trupin gjykues q\u00eb t\u00eb vler\u00ebsoj\u00eb mbi ligjshm\u00ebrin\u00eb e transferimit t\u00eb tyre.<\/p>\n<p>Shumica po ashtu gjeti jobind\u00ebs arsyetimin e Sevdarit p\u00ebr mosdeklarimin n\u00eb deklarat\u00ebn fillestare n\u00eb vitin 2003 t\u00eb t\u00eb ardhurave t\u00eb p\u00ebrfituara nga bashk\u00ebshorti si gjeodez n\u00eb Arabin\u00eb Saudite rreth 12 mij\u00eb euro.<\/p>\n<p>Provat q\u00eb Sevdari vendosi n\u00eb dispozicion p\u00ebr t\u00eb dokumentuar k\u00ebt\u00eb t\u00eb ardhur n\u00eb vler\u00ebn 12 mij\u00eb euro, p\u00ebrfshi fotografi t\u00eb t\u00eb shoqit n\u00eb pun\u00eb dhe d\u00ebshmi nga kompania q\u00eb e kishte pun\u00ebsuar, u cil\u00ebsuan vet\u00ebm si indicie nga shumica.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cAto p\u00ebrmbajn\u00eb indicie lidhur me faktin e angazhimit profesional t\u00eb personit t\u00eb lidhur dhe p\u00ebrfitimit prej tij t\u00eb t\u00eb ardhurave n\u00eb k\u00ebmbim t\u00eb k\u00ebtij angazhimi, por jo prova t\u00eb plota, t\u00eb mjaftueshme, lidhur me ekzistenc\u00ebn e burimit t\u00eb ligjsh\u00ebm t\u00eb t\u00eb ardhurave dhe vler\u00ebs s\u00eb tyre t\u00eb deklaruar prej 12.000 eurosh\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb arsyetim.<\/p>\n<p>Shumica u bazua fort n\u00eb mosprovimin prej ish-prokurores se p\u00ebr k\u00ebto t\u00eb ardhura ishte paguar detyrimi tatimor. Pretendimi i Sevdarit se detyrimi p\u00ebr t\u00eb paguar tatimet n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb rast i takonte kompanis\u00eb u cil\u00ebsua jobind\u00ebs.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cKy pretendim nuk arrin t\u00eb bind\u00eb trupin gjykues q\u00eb p\u00ebrfitimi i k\u00ebsaj pagese nga personi i lidhur nuk ka qen\u00eb n\u00eb keqbesim (sa u takon detyrimeve ndaj shtetit)\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendim. Po ashtu m\u00eb tej shumica arsyetoi se Sevdari nuk kishte b\u00ebr\u00eb p\u00ebrpjekje konkrete \u201cp\u00ebr t\u00eb siguruar informacion\u201d sa i p\u00ebrket t\u00eb ardhurave nga Greqia, qoft\u00eb 12 mij\u00eb eurove nga puna n\u00eb Arabin\u00eb Saudite n\u00eb vitin 2003.<\/p>\n<p>N\u00eb t\u00eb nj\u00ebjt\u00ebn linj\u00eb shumica arsyetoi edhe sa i p\u00ebrket rreth 20 mij\u00eb dollar\u00ebve t\u00eb p\u00ebrfituara nga puna p\u00ebr nj\u00eb kompani Italiane n\u00eb vitin 2006. Shumica pranoi n\u00eb nj\u00eb far\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb se deklarimet e Sevdarit ishin t\u00eb besueshme, por i cil\u00ebsoi ato jobind\u00ebse.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cT\u00eb dh\u00ebna nga subjekti n\u00eb pyet\u00ebsor\u00ebt e Komisionit, si dhe para Kolegjit, i deklarat\u00ebs periodike\/vjetore t\u00eb vitit 2006 dhe asaj vetting, trupi gjykues, arrin deri n\u00eb nivelin e besueshm\u00ebris\u00eb (por jo at\u00eb t\u00eb bindjes) p\u00ebr sa i takon faktit t\u00eb angazhimit t\u00eb bashk\u00ebshortit t\u00eb subjektit n\u00eb ofrimin e sh\u00ebrbimeve gjeodezike p\u00ebr kompanin\u00eb {***} s.p.a., deg\u00ebs s\u00eb saj n\u00eb Mbret\u00ebrin\u00eb e Arabis\u00eb Saudite, n\u00eb periudh\u00ebn 27.02.2006-24.07.2006\u201d, thuhet n\u00eb vendim.<\/p>\n<p>Mbi k\u00ebt\u00eb argument, shumica arsyetoi se Sevdari duhej t\u00eb ishte siguruar q\u00eb p\u00ebr k\u00ebto t\u00eb ardhura t\u00eb ishin paguar detyrimet tatimore. Pretendimin e ish-prokurores se ato ishin paguar n\u00eb vendin e pun\u00ebsimit dhe se legjislacioni nuk parashikonte detyrim p\u00ebr t\u00eb deklaruar edhe n\u00eb Shqip\u00ebri, shumica e rr\u00ebzoi si t\u00eb pabazuar n\u00eb ligj.<\/p>\n<p>Sipas shumic\u00ebs \u201cpavar\u00ebsisht pages\u00ebs ose jo t\u00eb tatimit mbi t\u00eb ardhurat realizuar n\u00eb Mbret\u00ebrin\u00eb e Arabis\u00eb Saudite, personi i lidhur me subjektin e rivler\u00ebsimit kishte detyrimin p\u00ebr t\u00eb deklaruar pran\u00eb organeve tatimore shqiptare t\u00eb ardhurat bruto t\u00eb realizuara\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>Shumica po ashtu penalizoi Sevdarin duke arsyetuar se ajo vet\u00eb duhej \u201ct\u00eb shtonte kujdesin e subjektit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit p\u00ebr t\u00eb garantuar p\u00ebrmbushjen e \u00e7do detyrimi ligjor t\u00eb bashk\u00ebshortit t\u00eb saj n\u00eb raport me detyrimet tatimore mbi k\u00ebto t\u00eb ardhura\u201d. KPA arsyetoi me shumic\u00eb se kjo \u201cduhej t\u00eb p\u00ebrb\u00ebnte p\u00ebr subjektin domosdoshm\u00ebri, sidomos gjat\u00eb procesit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit\u201d, nd\u00ebrsa pretendoi se p\u00ebrpjekjet e saj n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb drejtim mbet\u00ebn n\u00eb nivel pretendimi.<\/p>\n<p>Sipas KPA, Sevdari n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb pik\u00eb kishte \u201cc\u00ebnuar besimin e publikut te drejt\u00ebsia\u201d, pasi duke qen\u00eb prokurore p\u00ebrgjegj\u00ebse \u201cp\u00ebr ndjekjen e veprave penale n\u00eb lidhje me taksat dhe tatimet\u201d mosprovimin prej saj t\u00eb pagimit t\u00eb tatimit n\u00eb p\u00ebrputhje me legjislacionin e zbatuesh\u00ebm n\u00eb fuqi ishte \u201ci papranuesh\u00ebm\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>Ngjash\u00ebm shumica argumentoi edhe sa i p\u00ebrket humbjes s\u00eb afatit t\u00eb ankimit p\u00ebr nj\u00eb \u00e7\u00ebshtje penale edhe pse pranoi se rrethanat e pamund\u00ebsis\u00eb ishin t\u00eb v\u00ebrteta. Shumica n\u00eb KPA arsyetoi se edhe pse kjo paraqitej si situat\u00eb e izoluar dhe nuk ishte e mjaftueshme p\u00ebr t\u2019u konsideruar mang\u00ebsi profesionale, ai e gjeti at\u00eb si \u201cd\u00ebshtim t\u00eb organit t\u00eb prokuroris\u00eb p\u00ebr t\u00eb \u00e7uar deri n\u00eb fund ndjekjen penale ndaj zyrtar\u00ebve publik\u00eb<strong>\u201d, <\/strong>q\u00eb sillte c\u00ebnim t\u00eb besimit t\u00eb publikut te drejt\u00ebsia.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Mendimi n\u00eb pakic\u00eb<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ndryshe nga kat\u00ebr koleg\u00ebt e tjer\u00eb, Ina Rama arsyetoi se ky q\u00ebndrim i fundit i Kolegjit ishte shkelje procedurash. \u201cS\u00eb pari, n\u00eb drejtim t\u00eb k\u00ebtij konkluzioni duhet t\u00eb ve\u00e7oj faktin se kushtet e parashikuara n\u00eb nenin 61, pika 5 e ligjit nr. 84\/2016, n\u00eb drejtim t\u00eb sjelljes s\u00eb subjektit q\u00eb ka cenuar besimin e publikut, nuk jan\u00eb pretenduar se kan\u00eb ekzistuar as nga Komisioneri Publik n\u00eb ankimin e paraqitur prej tij\u201d, shprehet Rama.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cN\u00eb k\u00ebto rrethana, Kolegji ka tejkaluar, n\u00eb vler\u00ebsimin tim, shkaqet e ankimit n\u00eb d\u00ebm t\u00eb interesave t\u00eb subjektit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit, znj. Antoneta Sevdari, duke cenuar t\u00eb drejt\u00ebn e saj p\u00ebr nj\u00eb proces t\u00eb rregullt\u201d, shprehet an\u00ebtarja n\u00eb pakic\u00eb e KPA.<\/p>\n<p>Rama po ashtu shprehet se arsyetimi n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb rast \u00e7alonte edhe n\u00eb logjik\u00eb p\u00ebr shkak se pretendimi i shumic\u00ebs se Sevdari duhej t\u00eb kishte njoftuar epror\u00ebt p\u00ebr mosankimin binte ndesh pik\u00ebrisht me pamund\u00ebsin\u00eb q\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb v\u00ebrtetuar.<\/p>\n<p>An\u00ebtarja e KPA-s\u00eb, Ina Rama ndan q\u00ebndrim t\u00eb ndrysh\u00ebm edhe sa i p\u00ebrket vler\u00ebsimit t\u00eb pasuris\u00eb s\u00eb Sevdarit. Duke e ndar\u00eb \u00e7\u00ebshtjen n\u00eb dy pjes\u00eb, \u201cburimin e ligjsh\u00ebm\u201d dhe \u201cpagimin e tatimit\u201d, Rama arsyeton se ish-prokurorja kishte provuar q\u00eb pasuria e saj kishte burim t\u00eb ligjsh\u00ebm, por pranon arsyetimin e shumic\u00ebs mbi faktin se ajo nuk mund t\u00eb provonte pages\u00ebn e tatimit mbi t\u00eb ardhurat edhe pse nuk e sheh at\u00eb si shkarkues.<\/p>\n<p>P\u00ebrndryshe nga shumica, Rama referon nj\u00eb s\u00ebr\u00eb dokumentesh q\u00eb Sevdari kishte v\u00ebn\u00eb n\u00eb dispozicion p\u00ebr t\u00eb provuar pun\u00ebsimin e t\u00eb shoqit n\u00eb Greqi, p\u00ebrfshi k\u00ebrkes\u00ebn p\u00ebr leje q\u00ebndrimi, nj\u00eb kontrat\u00eb pune dhe po ashtu edhe dokumente t\u00eb tjera q\u00eb sipas gjyqtares provojn\u00eb pun\u00ebsimin e tij t\u00eb ligjsh\u00ebm n\u00eb Greqi.<\/p>\n<p>Rama po ashtu kund\u00ebrshton arsyetimin e shumic\u00ebs se t\u00eb ardhurat n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb rast mund t\u00eb mos ishin t\u00eb ligjshme apo mund t\u00eb vinin prej ndonj\u00eb aktiviteti t\u00eb paligjsh\u00ebm. \u201cMendoj se \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb q\u00ebndrim n\u00eb shkelje t\u00eb parimit kushtetues t\u00eb prezumimit t\u00eb pafaj\u00ebsis\u00eb, p\u00ebrderisa nuk rezulton asnj\u00eb e dh\u00ebn\u00eb qoft\u00eb edhe e t\u00ebrthort\u00eb se bashk\u00ebshorti i subjektit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit t\u00eb ket\u00eb kryer n\u00eb shtetin grek ndonj\u00eb aktivitet q\u00eb do t\u00eb konsiderohej apo dyshohej si i kund\u00ebrligjsh\u00ebm\u201d, shprehet ajo.<\/p>\n<p>Rama po ashtu arsyeton se sa i p\u00ebrket t\u00eb ardhurave n\u00eb Greqi provat e t\u00ebrthorta si paisja me leje q\u00ebndrimi tregonin se tatimet p\u00ebr k\u00ebto t\u00eb ardhura duhej t\u00eb ishin paguar bazuar n\u00eb legjislacionin grek edhe pse nuk kishte nivel provueshm\u00ebrie.<\/p>\n<p>T\u00eb nj\u00ebjtin arsyetim, ajo p\u00ebrdor edhe p\u00ebr shum\u00ebn prej 12 mij\u00eb eurosh t\u00eb p\u00ebrfituar nga puna n\u00eb Arabin\u00eb Saudite, q\u00eb sipas gjyqtares n\u00eb pakic\u00eb provohet prej dokumenteve t\u00eb depozitura dhe po ashtu edhe vulave n\u00eb pasaport\u00ebn e bashk\u00ebshortit t\u00eb Sevdarit.<\/p>\n<p>Nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb thekson se \u201cprovohet se puna e kryer prej bashk\u00ebshortit t\u00eb subjektit n\u00eb Arabin\u00eb Saudite, \u00ebsht\u00eb kryer prej tij n\u00eb vijim t\u00eb nj\u00eb marr\u00ebdh\u00ebnieje pune t\u00eb rregullt, q\u00eb ai kishte me k\u00ebt\u00eb kompani, dhe \u00ebsht\u00eb paguar brenda territorit t\u00eb shtetit shqiptar\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>Sipas Ram\u00ebs \u201csubjekti ka provuar bindsh\u00ebm burimin e ligjsh\u00ebm t\u00eb krijimit t\u00eb k\u00ebtyre t\u00eb ardhurave\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>Ngjash\u00ebm ajo ka arsyetuar n\u00eb lidhje me shum\u00ebn prej 20 mij\u00eb dollar\u00ebsh n\u00eb vitin 2006. Sipas saj \u201csubjekti ka paraqitur dokumentacion q\u00eb tregon n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb t\u00eb detajuar e konkrete pun\u00ebn e kryer nga bashk\u00ebshorti e koleg\u00ebt e tij, si inxhinier\u00eb n\u00eb Arabin\u00eb Saudite n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb periudh\u00eb\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>Rama i referohet faktit q\u00eb sigurimi i dokumenteve nga Arabia Saudite n\u00ebse ishin paguar apo jo tatimet atje ishte i v\u00ebshtir\u00eb. \u201cDeklarimi i k\u00ebsaj shume q\u00eb n\u00eb deklaratat periodike t\u00eb vitit 2006, tregon p\u00ebr mir\u00ebbesimin e subjektit se kjo e ardhur ishte krijuar n\u00eb p\u00ebrputhje t\u00eb plot\u00eb me legjislacionin dhe se nuk kishte asgj\u00eb p\u00ebr t\u00eb fshehur\u201d, arsyeton ajo.<\/p>\n<p>Rama sjell n\u00eb v\u00ebmendje t\u00eb Kolegjit faktin se bashk\u00ebshorti i Sevdarit \u201crezulton t\u00eb jet\u00eb nj\u00eb tatimpagues i rregullt\u201d n\u00eb Shqip\u00ebri dhe megjith\u00ebse \u201cnuk u provua tej \u00e7do dyshimi\u201d se detyrimet tatimore p\u00ebr t\u00eb ardhurat e fituara jasht\u00eb vendit ishin paguar, ato duhej t\u00eb ishin par\u00eb n\u00eb raport me t\u00eb ardhurat totale.<\/p>\n<p>Duke arsyetuar se n\u00eb rastin e Sevdarit nuk kishte deklarim t\u00eb pasakt\u00eb, deklarim t\u00eb rrem\u00eb apo p\u00ebrpjekje p\u00ebr fshehje pasurie, Rama thot\u00eb se Kolegji duhej t\u00eb aplikonte standardin e \u201cdyfishit t\u00eb pasuris\u00eb\u201d dhe jo at\u00eb \u201ct\u00eb pamjaftueshm\u00ebris\u00eb s\u00eb deklarimit\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>Duke arsyetuar p\u00ebr pun\u00ebn e bashk\u00ebshortit t\u00eb Sevdarit n\u00eb Arabin\u00eb Saudite n\u00eb kushte t\u00eb v\u00ebshtira dhe larg familjes, Rama vler\u00ebson se k\u00ebto ishin shenja integriteti t\u00eb fitimit t\u00eb t\u00eb ardhurave p\u00ebrmes pun\u00ebs dhe jo e kund\u00ebrta.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cMendoj se kjo zgjedhje do t\u00eb duhej t\u00eb vler\u00ebsohej si nj\u00eb shenj\u00eb integriteti e p\u00ebrgjegjshm\u00ebrie e subjektit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit edhe nga publiku, por edhe nga Kolegji, dhe t\u00eb ishte pjes\u00eb e vler\u00ebsimit t\u00eb p\u00ebrgjithsh\u00ebm t\u00eb marr\u00ebdh\u00ebnies s\u00eb saj n\u00eb raport me besimin e publikut,\u201d thuhet n\u00eb arsyetim.<\/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 vendosi 4 me 1 p\u00ebr shkarkimin e Antoneta Sevdarit, duke arsyetuar se megjith\u00ebse kishte t\u00eb dh\u00ebna t\u00eb pun\u00ebsimit t\u00eb bashk\u00ebshortit n\u00eb Greqi dhe Arabin\u00eb Saudite, mosv\u00ebrtetimi i pagimit t\u00eb tatimeve p\u00ebr t\u00eb ardhurat e siguruara jasht\u00eb vendit e penalizonin subjektin. \u00a0<!-- 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":76024,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[13,481,415,114,473],"tags":[422,112,221,149,359],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/www.reporter.al\/wp-content\/uploads\/sevdari.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"KPA gjate shqyrtimit te ankimin ndaj prokurores Antoneta Sevdari | Foto : LSA","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/76023"}],"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=76023"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/76023\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":76025,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/76023\/revisions\/76025"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/76024"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=76023"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=76023"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=76023"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}