{"id":78383,"date":"2024-06-13T18:45:37","date_gmt":"2024-06-13T16:45:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/kpa-e-shkarkoi-prokurorin-naim-tota-per-deklarim-te-pamjaftueshem-te-pasurise\/2024\/06\/13\/"},"modified":"2024-06-13T18:47:37","modified_gmt":"2024-06-13T16:47:37","slug":"kpa-e-shkarkoi-prokurorin-naim-tota-per-deklarim-te-pamjaftueshem-te-pasurise","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/kpa-e-shkarkoi-prokurorin-naim-tota-per-deklarim-te-pamjaftueshem-te-pasurise\/2024\/06\/13\/","title":{"rendered":"KPA e shkarkoi prokurorin Naim Tota p\u00ebr deklarim t\u00eb pamjaftuesh\u00ebm t\u00eb pasuris\u00eb"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Prokurori i Tiran\u00ebs, Naim Tota u konfirmua n\u00eb detyr\u00eb prej Komisionit t\u00eb Pavarur t\u00eb Kualifikimit, KPK\u00a0me shumic\u00eb votash m\u00eb 10 mars 2023, pasi shpjegimet e tij p\u00ebr barrat e prov\u00ebs n\u00eb kriterin e pasuris\u00eb dhe gjetjet p\u00ebr profesionalizmin, u konsideruan bind\u00ebse nga shumica e p\u00ebrb\u00ebr\u00eb nga komisioneret Brunilda Bekteshi dhe Pamela Qirko.<\/p>\n<p>An\u00ebtari n\u00eb pakic\u00eb, Roland Ilia vler\u00ebsoi se Tota duhej t\u00eb ishte shkarkuar pasi nuk arrinte nivel t\u00eb besuesh\u00ebm p\u00ebr pasurin\u00eb. Ilia \u00e7moi se subjekti nuk dha shpjegime bind\u00ebse p\u00ebr nj\u00eb apartament q\u00eb ka bler\u00eb nga kunati n\u00eb vitin 2016 n\u00ebp\u00ebrmjet nj\u00eb kontrate cedimi, pasuri p\u00ebr t\u00eb cil\u00ebn u ngrit\u00ebn fillimisht dyshime se ishte fshehur p\u00ebr 12 vjet, pasi ishte p\u00ebrdorur vet\u00ebm nga prokurorit Tota prej vitit 2004, thuajse pa kund\u00ebrshp\u00ebrblim.<\/p>\n<p>Ilia nuk e vler\u00ebsoi bind\u00ebse p\u00ebrgjigjen e Tot\u00ebs se lidhja e posa\u00e7me familjare; fatkeq\u00ebsia n\u00eb vitin 2006 kur i nd\u00ebrroi jet\u00eb bashk\u00ebshortja e ndjer\u00eb; si dhe huadh\u00ebnia e nj\u00eb shume 40 mij\u00eb euro kunatit &#8211; jan\u00eb arsyet e p\u00ebrfitimit dhe g\u00ebzimit n\u00eb vitin 2004 t\u00eb k\u00ebsaj banese, pa kund\u00ebrshp\u00ebrblim. Po ashtu, Ilia ndryshe nga shumica, \u00e7moi se subjekti nuk arriti t\u00eb provoj\u00eb aft\u00ebsin\u00eb paguese t\u00eb kunatit p\u00ebr t\u00eb bler\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb apartament n\u00eb vitin 2003, kundrejt vler\u00ebs 50 mij\u00eb euro, po aq sa pagoi edhe Tota n\u00eb 2016-\u00ebn.<\/p>\n<p>Operacioni Nd\u00ebrkomb\u00ebtar i Monitorimit, ONM rekomandoi apelimin e \u00e7\u00ebshtjes dhe Komisionerja Publike, Irena Nino e ankimoi at\u00eb n\u00eb Kolegjin e Posa\u00e7\u00ebm t\u00eb Apelimit n\u00eb maj 2023.<\/p>\n<p>Ashtu si ONM, edhe Nino vler\u00ebsoi se subjekti ka qen\u00eb poseduesi de facto i apartamentit n\u00eb Tiran\u00eb dhe k\u00ebrkoi q\u00eb kjo situat\u00eb t\u00eb konsiderohej n\u00eb vler\u00ebsimin e p\u00ebrgjithsh\u00ebm n\u00eb lidhje me cenimin e besimit t\u00eb publikut tek drejt\u00ebsia. Po ashtu, Komisionerja Publike vler\u00ebsoi se Tota nuk arriti t\u00eb p\u00ebrmbyste barr\u00ebn e prov\u00ebs lidhur me v\u00ebrtetimin e burimit t\u00eb ligjsh\u00ebm t\u00eb nj\u00eb huaje 400 mij\u00eb lek\u00eb t\u00eb marr\u00eb prej bashk\u00ebshortes s\u00eb ndjer\u00eb nga motra e saj, me q\u00ebllim investimin n\u00eb shoq\u00ebrin\u00eb ku punonte, prej nga m\u00eb von\u00eb subjekti ka p\u00ebrfituar nj\u00eb vler\u00eb prej 40 mij\u00eb eurosh. Nino u shpreh se balancat negative t\u00eb konstatuara nuk justifikojn\u00eb n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb objektive mas\u00ebn e proporcionalitetit.<\/p>\n<p>Kolegji i Posa\u00e7\u00ebm i Apelimit ka shqyrtuar fillimisht pretendimin e Komisioneres Publike se subjekti i nuk ka arritur t\u00eb p\u00ebrmbys\u00eb barr\u00ebn e prov\u00ebs, p\u00ebr sa i p\u00ebrket shpjegimit t\u00eb arsyeve t\u00eb sjelljes s\u00eb tij si pronar de facto i apartamentit q\u00eb n\u00eb vitin 2004, si nj\u00eb nga element\u00ebt mbi t\u00eb cil\u00ebt \u00ebsht\u00eb ngritur dyshimi se kjo pasuri ka qen\u00eb e tij q\u00eb n\u00eb fillimet e krijimit t\u00eb saj.<\/p>\n<p>KPA konstaton se Komisioni ka arritur n\u00eb p\u00ebrfundime konfirmuese t\u00eb shpjegimeve t\u00eb subjektit lidhur me k\u00ebt\u00eb situat\u00eb, duke konsideruar se ai kishte qen\u00eb bind\u00ebs p\u00ebr sa i takon sjelljes n\u00eb dukje si pronar i k\u00ebsaj pasurie, si veprime q\u00eb ishin kryer n\u00eb mir\u00ebbesim p\u00ebr shkak t\u00eb marr\u00ebdh\u00ebnieve t\u00eb posa\u00e7me, ve\u00e7an\u00ebrisht n\u00eb kontekstin e situat\u00ebs s\u00eb v\u00ebshtir\u00eb jet\u00ebsore n\u00eb t\u00eb cil\u00ebn u gjend familja pasi bashk\u00ebshortja nd\u00ebrroi jet\u00eb. Sipas shumic\u00ebs s\u00eb KPK, Tota e ka deklaruar k\u00ebt\u00eb pasuri si adres\u00ebn e tij t\u00eb banimit p\u00ebr t\u00eb gjith\u00eb periudh\u00ebn q\u00eb ka banuar n\u00eb t\u00eb, duke demonstruar se nuk ka pasur asnj\u00ebher\u00eb q\u00ebllim p\u00ebr fshehje t\u00eb saj.<\/p>\n<p>Trupi gjykues i KPA \u00e7mon se duhen vler\u00ebsuar n\u00eb harmoni t\u00eb gjitha t\u00eb dh\u00ebnat e nxjerra nga hetimi p\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb pasuri dhe rendit ato q\u00eb duhet t\u00eb merren n\u00eb analiz\u00eb. Kolegji vler\u00ebson se Tota, q\u00eb prej vendosjes n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb banes\u00eb n\u00eb vitin 2004, duhej ta deklaronte marr\u00ebdh\u00ebnien juridike nga i buronin t\u00eb drejtat reale p\u00ebr p\u00ebrdorimin e k\u00ebsaj pasurie.<\/p>\n<p>\u201c[\u2026]Sjellja e subjektit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit me pron\u00ebn, g\u00ebzimi dhe p\u00ebrdorimi i saj jo prej pronar\u00ebve t\u00eb pretenduar, por vet\u00ebm prej subjektit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit dhe familjes s\u00eb tij, n\u00eb raport me gjith\u00eb provat e tjera t\u00eb analizuara, duket se q\u00ebndron n\u00eb nj\u00eb raport t\u00eb zhdrejt\u00eb, p\u00ebr sa i p\u00ebrket asaj q\u00eb subjekti pretendon apo ofron n\u00eb k\u00ebmbim t\u00eb k\u00ebtij p\u00ebrfitimi\u201d, v\u00ebren KPA dhe shton se pronar\u00ebt de jure kan\u00eb investuar 50- mij\u00eb USD n\u00eb vitin 2003 p\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb pasuri, duke shpenzuar nj\u00eb pjes\u00eb t\u00eb r\u00ebnd\u00ebsishme t\u00eb t\u00eb ardhurave t\u00eb tyre q\u00eb kan\u00eb qen\u00eb t\u00eb kufizuara.<\/p>\n<p>N\u00eb vijim, KPA sjell n\u00eb v\u00ebmendje se familja e motr\u00ebs s\u00eb subjektit ka jetuar me t\u00eb ardhura nga puna, e cila \u00ebsht\u00eb pretenduar se ka prodhuar edhe shp\u00ebrblime t\u00eb tjera ve\u00e7 pag\u00ebs, si komisione t\u00eb paprovuara. \u201c[\u2026]Por q\u00eb edhe n\u00eb versionin q\u00eb jep subjekti nuk p\u00ebrfaq\u00ebsojn\u00eb n\u00eb asnj\u00eb rast vlera t\u00eb tilla q\u00eb do t\u00eb b\u00ebnin indiferent\u00eb krijuesit e tyre, p\u00ebr investimin n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb vler\u00eb dhe mosp\u00ebrdorimin e pron\u00ebs, p\u00ebr nj\u00eb periudh\u00eb kaq t\u00eb gjat\u00eb kohe\u201d, vler\u00ebson Kolegji dhe konstaton se kunati i Tot\u00ebs q\u00eb e ka bler\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb pasuri, jo vet\u00ebm nuk e ka p\u00ebrdorur asnj\u00ebher\u00eb, por ka jetuar vet\u00eb me qira deri sa ka nd\u00ebrtuar banes\u00ebn e tij private.<\/p>\n<p>P\u00ebr rrjedhoj\u00eb, trupi gjykues i Kolegjit \u00e7mon se \u00ebsht\u00eb i drejt\u00eb dhe i mb\u00ebshtetur n\u00eb situat\u00ebn faktike pretendimi i Komisioneres Publike se subjekti nuk ka mundur t\u00eb jap\u00eb nj\u00eb shpjegim t\u00eb logjiksh\u00ebm dhe bind\u00ebs p\u00ebr p\u00ebrdorimin e apartamentit.<\/p>\n<p>N\u00eb vijim, KPA analizon pretendimin e Komisioneres, se subjekti nuk ka arritur t\u00eb provoj\u00eb mund\u00ebsin\u00eb e kunatit p\u00ebr blerjen e apartamentit, q\u00eb e ka p\u00ebrdorur pa kund\u00ebrshp\u00ebrblim.<\/p>\n<p>Duke mos konsideruar si burime p\u00ebr blerjen e apartamentit nga familja e motr\u00ebs, t\u00eb shumave monetare n\u00eb depozitat e tyre bankare p\u00ebr shkak t\u00eb mosp\u00ebrfshirjes s\u00eb bonuseve nga komisionet e pretenduara si t\u00eb p\u00ebrfituara prej motr\u00ebs nga shoq\u00ebrit\u00eb e sigurimit, ka rezultuar nj\u00eb bilanc negativ n\u00eb vler\u00ebn rreth 3.3 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb.<\/p>\n<p>Megjith\u00ebse kjo balanc\u00eb negative e familjes s\u00eb motr\u00ebs s\u00eb subjektit vler\u00ebsohet se nuk ngarkon at\u00eb drejtp\u00ebrdrejt\u00eb me p\u00ebrgjegj\u00ebsi, \u00ebsht\u00eb \u00e7muar t\u00eb vler\u00ebsohet s\u00eb bashku me konkluzionet e tjera t\u00eb arritura nga kontrolli i marr\u00ebdh\u00ebnies s\u00eb subjektit me k\u00ebt\u00eb pasuri.<\/p>\n<p>Q\u00ebndrimi i shumic\u00ebs s\u00eb Komisionit m\u00ebnyra e kontrollit t\u00eb k\u00ebtyre burimeve, p\u00ebr shkak t\u00eb faktit se k\u00ebta individ\u00eb nuk jan\u00eb n\u00eb rrethin e personave t\u00eb lidhur me subjektin, gjendet pa lidhje n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb rast. \u201cP\u00ebrderisa vet\u00eb Komisioni n\u00eb raportin e rezultateve paraprake t\u00eb hetimit ka ngritur dyshime t\u00eb artikuluara qart\u00eb e t\u00eb shoq\u00ebruara me barr\u00ebn e prov\u00ebs p\u00ebr t\u2019i kund\u00ebrshtuar ato, niveli i kontrollit t\u00eb burimeve t\u00eb personave q\u00eb mbajn\u00eb pasurin\u00eb de jure nuk mund t\u00eb limitohet p\u00ebr shkak t\u00eb ndonj\u00eb standardi ligjor, por ai vler\u00ebsohet rast pas rasti prej vet\u00eb organeve t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit n\u00eb p\u00ebrputhje me nevojat e rastit p\u00ebr hetim\u201d, shprehet KPA.<\/p>\n<p>Nga analizimi i rrethanave t\u00eb kontrat\u00ebs s\u00eb cedimit t\u00eb vitit 2016, \u00ebsht\u00eb konstatuar se subjekti pas 12 vitesh posedim t\u00eb pand\u00ebprer\u00eb dhe pothuaj pa shp\u00ebrblim, i ka fituar t\u00eb drejtat p\u00ebr t\u00eb nj\u00ebjtin \u00e7mim t\u00eb paguar nga kunati n\u00eb vitin 2003, megjith\u00ebse sipas \u00e7mimit t\u00eb tregut, vlera ishte trefish m\u00eb e lart\u00eb. Kjo, rrethan\u00eb vler\u00ebsohet se duket se e favorizon Tot\u00ebn n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb t\u00eb paarsyeshme.<\/p>\n<p>KPA vler\u00ebson se, nisur nga deklarimi se subjekti i kishte dh\u00ebn\u00eb hua kunatit shum\u00ebn 40 mij\u00eb euro n\u00eb n\u00eb vitin 2008, kjo duhej t\u00eb ishte konsideruar n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00ebn e shlyerjen s\u00eb detyrimit p\u00ebr apartamentin, si kompensim i detyrimeve.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cMos p\u00ebrdorja e k\u00ebtij instituti p\u00ebr t\u00eb shuar dy detyrime, t\u00eb cilat sipas deklarimeve i p\u00ebrkasin nj\u00eb kohe t\u00eb larg\u00ebt dhe q\u00eb pavar\u00ebsisht se ekzistonin nj\u00ebkoh\u00ebsisht n\u00eb vitin 2016, e duket se kan\u00eb humbur q\u00ebllimin e tyre, sugjeron p\u00ebr dyshime t\u00eb arsyeshme rreth mosekzistenc\u00ebs s\u00eb tyre apo edhe pagimit n\u00eb realitet t\u00eb \u00e7mimit t\u00eb p\u00ebrcaktuar n\u00eb kontrat\u00ebn e cedimit, rrethan\u00eb q\u00eb i bashk\u00eblidhet fakteve t\u00eb tjera t\u00eb arsyetuara m\u00eb lart, t\u00eb cilat konfirmojn\u00eb panoram\u00ebn e pretenduar prej Komisionerit Publik n\u00eb ankim se apartamenti ka qen\u00eb gjithmon\u00eb pasuri de facto e subjektit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit\u201d, arsyeton Kolegji.<\/p>\n<p>Megjithat\u00eb, Kolegji nuk e gjen t\u00eb sakt\u00eb pretendimin e Komisioneres Publike se Tota e ka fshehur k\u00ebt\u00eb pasuri, pasi rezulton q\u00eb ai ta ket\u00eb pasqyruar n\u00eb deklarat\u00ebn \u201cveting\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>\u201c[\u2026]N\u00eb vler\u00ebsimin e trupit gjykues nuk do t\u00eb gjente vend zbatimi i nenit 33, pika 5, shkronja \u201cc\u201d e ligjit nr. 84\/2016, e cila do t\u00eb kualifikonte situat\u00ebn n\u00eb t\u00eb cil\u00ebn n\u00eb deklarat\u00ebn vetting subjekti do t\u00eb kishte heshtur p\u00ebr ekzistenc\u00ebn e marr\u00ebdh\u00ebnies s\u00eb tij me k\u00ebt\u00eb pasuri, duke synuar shmangien e kontrollit t\u00eb organeve t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit p\u00ebr t\u00eb\u201d, citohet n\u00eb vendim.<\/p>\n<p>Por, evidentohet se situata e paligjshm\u00ebris\u00eb rreth deklarimeve t\u00eb subjektit q\u00ebndron dhe se ato duhen konsideruar si t\u00eb pav\u00ebrteta e t\u00eb rreme me synim deformimin e rezultateve t\u00eb kontrollit q\u00eb do ushtrohet mbi k\u00ebt\u00eb pasuri prej organeve t\u00eb vetingut n\u00eb drejtim t\u00eb burimeve t\u00eb krijimit. Sipas KPA, n\u00eb vitin 2003 kan\u00eb munguar burimet financiare p\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb pasuri.<\/p>\n<p>N\u00eb p\u00ebrfundim, Kolegji konkludon se prokurori Naim Tota ka kryer deklarim t\u00eb rrem\u00eb p\u00ebr apartamentin.<\/p>\n<p>KPA ka gjetur t\u00eb drejt\u00eb pretendimet e Komisioneres Nino se subjekti nuk ka pasur burime t\u00eb ligjshme p\u00ebr blerjen e aksioneve nga bashk\u00ebshortja n\u00eb vitin 2005, prej nga ka p\u00ebrfituar shum\u00ebn prej 40 mij\u00eb eurosh, t\u00eb pasqyruar n\u00eb deklarat\u00ebn \u201cveting\u201d. N\u00eb vendim konstatohet se familja e subjektit rezulton me bilanc negativ n\u00eb shum\u00ebn 19 milion\u00eb lek\u00eb n\u00eb vitin 2005.<\/p>\n<p>Pasi ka marr\u00eb n\u00eb shqyrtim dhe shkakun e ankimit t\u00eb Ninos p\u00ebr analiz\u00ebn financiare t\u00eb kryer nga Komisioni p\u00ebr periudh\u00ebn 2003-2016, Kolegji ka konkluduar bilanc negativ n\u00eb vler\u00eb m\u00eb t\u00eb madhe. KPK ka gjetur bilanc negativ n\u00eb disa vite kur jan\u00eb konstatuar pasakt\u00ebsi n\u00eb deklarime, n\u00eb vler\u00ebn totale prej reth 1.5 milion\u00eb lek\u00ebsh. Nga korrigjimi k\u00ebsaj analize n\u00eb Kolegj, \u00ebsht\u00eb konklduar pamund\u00ebsi financiare n\u00eb vler\u00ebn totale prej rreth 3.4 milion\u00eb lek\u00ebsh.<\/p>\n<p>N\u00eb p\u00ebrfundim, Kolegji \u00e7mon se prokurori Tota ka b\u00ebr\u00eb deklarime t\u00eb pamjaftueshme n\u00eb kriterin e pasuris\u00eb.<\/p>\n<p>KPA ka analizuar dhe shkaqet e ngritura prej Komisioneres p\u00ebr aspektin profesional. N\u00eb shqyrtimin e nj\u00eb \u00e7\u00ebshtje t\u00eb hetuar nga subjekti, KPA e gjen t\u00eb drejt\u00eb konstatimin e Ninos se subjekti ka treguar mang\u00ebsi n\u00eb ushtrimin e funksioneve, p\u00ebr sa koh\u00eb q\u00eb n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb t\u00eb p\u00ebrs\u00ebritur nuk ka zbatuar urdh\u00ebrimet e vendimit t\u00eb gjykat\u00ebs, duke vepruar n\u00eb kund\u00ebrshtim me detyrimin e p\u00ebrcaktuar n\u00eb Kodin e Procedur\u00ebs Penale.<\/p>\n<p>Situata t\u00eb ngjashme p\u00ebr munges\u00eb hetimesh, kryerjen e hetimeve t\u00eb cunguara dhe moszbatim t\u00eb urdh\u00ebrimeve t\u00eb vendimeve t\u00eb gjykatave p\u00ebr kryerjen e hetimeve shtes\u00eb, jan\u00eb konstatuar dhe n\u00eb \u00e7\u00ebshtjet e trajtuara nga subjekti, t\u00eb cilat jan\u00eb identifikuar n\u00eb denoncimet e paraqitura n\u00eb Komision. Por, mang\u00ebsit\u00eb e gjetura n\u00eb kriterin profesional nuk jan\u00eb vler\u00ebsuar t\u00eb mjaftueshme p\u00ebr t\u00eb sjell\u00eb penalizim.<\/p>\n<p>Mb\u00ebshtetur n\u00eb konkluzionin e arritur n\u00eb kriterin e vler\u00ebsimit t\u00eb pasuris\u00eb, Kolegji \u00e7mon se ankimi i paraqitur prej Komisioneres Publike Irena Nino \u00ebsht\u00eb i drejt\u00eb dhe ka vendosur ndryshimin e vendimit t\u00eb Komisionit, duke e larguar prokurorin Naim Tota nga sistemi i drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb.<\/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 Tiran\u00ebs, Naim Tota u konfirmua n\u00eb detyr\u00eb prej Komisionit t\u00eb Pavarur t\u00eb Kualifikimit, KPK\u00a0me shumic\u00eb votash m\u00eb 10 mars 2023, pasi shpjegimet e tij p\u00ebr barrat e prov\u00ebs n\u00eb kriterin e pasuris\u00eb dhe gjetjet p\u00ebr profesionalizmin, u konsideruan bind\u00ebse nga shumica e p\u00ebrb\u00ebr\u00eb nga komisioneret Brunilda Bekteshi dhe Pamela Qirko. An\u00ebtari n\u00eb pakic\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":78384,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[13,114,115],"tags":[365,761,892,887,112,1281,1517,171,166,671,133,367,864,889,420],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/www.reporter.al\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/Seanca-ndaj-ish-prokurorit-Besnik-Cengu-ne-KPA.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"Seanca ndaj ish-prokurorit Besnik Cengu n\u00eb KPA","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/78383"}],"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=78383"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/78383\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":78385,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/78383\/revisions\/78385"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/78384"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=78383"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=78383"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=78383"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}