Kolegji i Posa\u00e7\u00ebm i Apelimit, KPA u nda n\u00eb vler\u00ebsimin lidhur me p\u00ebrfundimin e procesit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit ndaj ish-inspektores s\u00eb ish-K\u00ebshillit t\u00eb Lart\u00eb t\u00eb Drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb, Sofia Zhilla. Shumica e trupit gjykues t\u00eb KPA e p\u00ebrb\u00ebr\u00eb nga kryesuesja Rezarta Schuetz, relatorja Mimoza Tasi dhe an\u00ebtar\u00ebt Sokol \u00c7omo e Albana Shtylla, vler\u00ebsoi ta p\u00ebrmbyll\u00eb procesin pa nj\u00eb vendim p\u00ebrfundimtar, p\u00ebr arsye t\u00eb daljes s\u00eb subjektit n\u00eb pension. T\u00eb nj\u00ebjtin q\u00ebndrimi mbajti n\u00eb p\u00ebrfundim edhe ish-Komisionerja Irena Nino, e cila ndryshe nga shkaqet e ngritura n\u00eb ankim, tha q\u00eb t\u00eb lihej n\u00eb fuqi vendimmarrja e Komisionit t\u00eb cil\u00ebn e kishte kund\u00ebrshtuar si t\u00eb pabazuar. Nino konstatoi se Zhilla kishte mbushur mosh\u00ebn e pensionit t\u00eb pleq\u00ebris\u00eb dhe p\u00ebr rrjedhoj\u00eb shqyrtimi gjyq\u00ebsor ishte b\u00ebr\u00eb i pamundur.<\/p>\n
Nga ana tjet\u00ebr, an\u00ebtarja n\u00eb pakic\u00eb, Natasha Mulaj \u00e7moi se q\u00ebndrimi i subjektit e vendoste at\u00eb n\u00eb aplikimin e dispozitave kushtetuese q\u00eb p\u00ebrcaktojn\u00eb rastet e nd\u00ebrprerjes s\u00eb vetingut t\u00eb shoq\u00ebruar me mas\u00ebn p\u00ebr ndalimin e em\u00ebrimit n\u00eb funksone n\u00eb sistemin e drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb p\u00ebr nj\u00eb periudh\u00eb 15-vje\u00e7are.<\/p>\n
Komisioni i Pavarur i Kualifikimit, KPK konkludoi m\u00eb 29 maj me shumic\u00eb votash se Zhilla e kishte humbur statusin e subjektit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit p\u00ebr shkak t\u00eb dor\u00ebheqjes s\u00eb saj dhe e mbylli procesin e saj pa nj\u00eb vendim p\u00ebrfundimtar. Nd\u00ebrsa pakica \u00e7moi se nuk e kishte humbur statusin, pasi kishte qen\u00eb e em\u00ebruar nga kategoria e inspektor\u00ebve jomagjistrat\u00eb; se nuk ka shprehur vullnetin p\u00ebr t\u2019u dor\u00ebhequr nga procesi vetingut; si dhe ka shprehur vullnetin t\u00eb q\u00ebndroj\u00eb n\u00eb detyr\u00eb n\u00ebp\u00ebrmjet proceseve gjyq\u00ebsore q\u00eb ishin ende n\u00eb shqyrtim n\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebn e Lart\u00eb. N\u00eb p\u00ebrfundim, pakica e KPK vler\u00ebsoi se duhej t\u00eb kishte vijuar me procesin e rivler\u00ebsimit ndaj Zhill\u00ebs.<\/p>\n
Komisionerja Irena Nino ushtroi ankim n\u00eb KPA duke konstatuar se Zhilla ishte em\u00ebruar n\u00eb mars 2013 n\u00eb K\u00ebshillin e Lart\u00eb t\u00eb Drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb me nj\u00eb mandat 5-vje\u00e7ar dhe n\u00eb vitin 2018 i \u00ebsht\u00eb zgjatur mandati i inspektorit deri n\u00eb krijimin e zyr\u00ebs s\u00eb Inspektorit t\u00eb Lart\u00eb t\u00eb Drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb. Duke qen\u00eb n\u00eb cil\u00ebsin\u00eb e subjektit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit, ajo ka plot\u00ebsuar deklaratat p\u00ebrkat\u00ebse n\u00eb kuad\u00ebr t\u00eb procesit t\u00eb vetingut.<\/p>\n
Me vendim t\u00eb tetorit t\u00eb vitit 2019, K\u00ebshilli i Lart\u00eb Gjyq\u00ebsor, KLGJ ka deklaruar mospasjen e statusit \u201cMagjistrat\u201d p\u00ebr Zhill\u00ebn, por kjo vendimmarrje \u00ebsht\u00eb ankimuar n\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebn Administrative t\u00eb Apelit nga subjekti. N\u00eb vitin 2020, Apeli Administrativ e rr\u00ebzoi k\u00ebt\u00eb k\u00ebrkes\u00eb dhe Zhilla ju drejtua Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Lart\u00eb me rekurs. Nino vler\u00ebsoi n\u00eb ankim\u00a0 se nuk q\u00ebndronte arsyetimi p\u00ebrmbyll\u00ebs i Komisionit se, askujt prej atyre q\u00eb mund ta ken\u00eb humbur statusin e subjektit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit jo p\u00ebr vullnetin e tyre, nuk mund t\u2019i aplikohet ndalimi i parashikuar nga neni G, pika 2 e aneksit t\u00eb Kushtetut\u00ebs, q\u00eb ndalon riem\u00ebrimin e k\u00ebtyre subjekteve n\u00eb sistemin e drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb p\u00ebr 15 vjet.<\/p>\n
Megjithat\u00eb, kur u njoh provat e dor\u00ebzuara nga subjekti n\u00eb Kolegj, q\u00eb kishte vendosur n\u00eb dijeni daljen e saj n\u00eb pension, Nino tha ishte b\u00ebr\u00eb i pamundur vijimi shqyrtimit t\u00eb \u00e7\u00ebshtjes s\u00eb Zhill\u00ebs. Nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb, vet\u00eb subjekti k\u00ebrkoi mbylljen e procesit pa vendim p\u00ebrfundimtar.<\/p>\n
Shumica e Kolegjit vler\u00ebson se Zhilla, p\u00ebr shkak t\u00eb mbushjes s\u00eb mosh\u00ebs s\u00eb pensionit t\u00eb pleq\u00ebris\u00eb, nuk b\u00ebn m\u00eb pjes\u00eb n\u00eb rrethin e subjekteve q\u00eb i n\u00ebnshtrohen procesit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit kalimtar ex officio. \u201cN\u00eb vler\u00ebsim t\u00eb trupit gjykues, kjo rrethan\u00eb p\u00ebrb\u00ebn shkak p\u00ebr p\u00ebrfundimin e procesit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit kalimtar p\u00ebr subjektin e rivler\u00ebsimit, znj. Sofia Zhilla, pa nj\u00eb vendim p\u00ebrfundimtar, pasi objekti dhe q\u00ebllimi p\u00ebr t\u00eb cilin kishte nisur procedura e rivler\u00ebsimit kalimtar \u00ebsht\u00eb b\u00ebr\u00eb i pamundur dhe \u00e7do \u00e7\u00ebshtje e lidhur me k\u00ebt\u00eb proces, nuk mund t\u00eb vazhdoj\u00eb t\u00eb shqyrtohet n\u00eb Kolegj\u201d, arsyeton shumica.<\/p>\n
Mulaj n\u00eb pakic\u00eb, ver\u00ebson se konkluzionet e Komisionit, q\u00ebndrimi p\u00ebrfundimtar i ish-Komisioneres Publike dhe vendimarrja e shumic\u00ebs vijn\u00eb n\u00eb kund\u00ebrshtim me Kushtetut\u00ebn dhe ligjin e posa\u00e7\u00ebm p\u00ebr vetingun e magjistrat\u00ebve. Ajo konsideron t\u00eb r\u00ebnd\u00ebsish\u00ebm p\u00ebrcaktimin n\u00ebse Zhilla \u00ebsht\u00eb apo jo subjekt rivler\u00ebsimi, si dhe identifikimin e vullnetit t\u00eb subjektit p\u00ebr t\u2019iu n\u00ebnshtruar procesit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit kalimtar.<\/p>\n
Mulaj argumenton se Zhilla \u00ebsht\u00eb subjekt rivler\u00ebsimi kalimtar, pasi n\u00eb momentin e hyrjes n\u00eb fuqi t\u00eb ndryshimeve kushtetuese dhe ligjit p\u00ebr vetingun e magjistrat\u00ebve, ushtronte funksionin e inspektores pran\u00eb ish-K\u00ebshillit t\u00eb Lart\u00eb t\u00eb Drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb.<\/p>\n
Pakica sjell n\u00eb v\u00ebmendje, se krahas dispozitave sipas t\u00eb cilave Zhilla p\u00ebrcaktohet si subjekt, ajo e ka shprehur vullnetin e saj t\u00eb plot\u00eb, t\u00eb pavesuar, t\u00eb shkruar dhe t\u00eb formalizuar, p\u00ebr t\u00eb pasur statusin e magjistratit apo inspektorit dhe kthimin n\u00eb vendin e m\u00ebparsh\u00ebm t\u00eb pun\u00ebs, duke kund\u00ebrshtuar n\u00eb rrug\u00eb gjyq\u00ebsore deri n\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebn e Lart\u00eb, vendimet e KLGj-s\u00eb.<\/p>\n
P\u00ebr t\u00eb identifikuar vullnetin e Zhill\u00ebs p\u00ebr t\u2019iu n\u00ebnshtruar procesit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit kalimtar, Mulaj vler\u00ebson se k\u00ebrkesa e subjektit p\u00ebr t\u00eb mos iu n\u00ebnshtruar k\u00ebtij procesi, nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb q\u00eb ka pretenduar gjyq\u00ebsisht se e g\u00ebzonte statusin e magjistratit apo t\u00eb inspektorit q\u00eb e b\u00ebjn\u00eb at\u00eb subjekt rivler\u00ebsimi, duke k\u00ebrkuar edhe rikthimin n\u00eb pozicionin e m\u00ebparsh\u00ebm, p\u00ebrb\u00ebjn\u00eb rrethana q\u00eb e kualifikojn\u00eb situat\u00ebn sipas nenit G, pika 2 e Aneksit t\u00eb Kushtetut\u00ebs. Kjo dispozit\u00eb parashikon se kur magjistrati jep dor\u00ebheqjen dhe procesi i vetingut t\u00eb tij nd\u00ebrpritet, at\u00ebher\u00eb nuk mund t\u00eb em\u00ebrohet gjyqtar ose prokuror i \u00e7do niveli, an\u00ebtar i K\u00ebshillit t\u00eb Lart\u00eb Gjyq\u00ebsor ose i K\u00ebshillit t\u00eb Lart\u00eb t\u00eb Prokuroris\u00eb, Inspektor i Lart\u00eb i Drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb ose Prokuror i P\u00ebrgjithsh\u00ebm, p\u00ebr nj\u00eb periudh\u00eb 15-vje\u00e7are.<\/p>\n
Mulaj evidenton faktin se Zhilla i ka b\u00ebr\u00eb me dije Komisonit se p\u00ebr arsye t\u00eb vendimarrjes s\u00eb KLGJ, nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb m\u00eb subjekt rivler\u00ebsimi e p\u00ebr rrjedhoj\u00eb ka k\u00ebrkuar nd\u00ebrprerjen e vetingut t\u00eb saj dhe pushimin e \u00e7\u00ebshtjes. Po ashtu, ka k\u00ebrkuar vijimin e seanc\u00ebs d\u00ebgjimore pa pranin\u00eb e saj. sipas pakic\u00ebs, subjekti nuk u paraqit n\u00eb seanc\u00eb publike as gjat\u00eb shqyrtimit t\u00eb \u00e7\u00ebshtjes n\u00eb Kolegj, edhe pse kishte marr\u00eb dijeni rregullisht p\u00ebr zhvillimin e saj, si dhe nuk paraqiti asnj\u00eb k\u00ebrkes\u00eb p\u00ebr shtyrjen e seanc\u00ebs p\u00ebr ndonj\u00eb shkak t\u00eb arsyesh\u00ebm.<\/p>\n
Gjyqtarja Mulaj arsyeton se aplikimi i nenit G, pika 2 e Aneksit t\u00eb Kushtetut\u00ebs, vjen si pasoj\u00eb e vullnetit t\u00eb subjektit p\u00ebr nd\u00ebrprerjen e procesit t\u00eb vetingut, si dhe veprimeve t\u00eb nd\u00ebrmarra prej tij, q\u00eb demostrojn\u00eb p\u00ebrpjekje p\u00ebr t\u2019iu shmangur apo p\u00ebr mos t\u2019iu n\u00ebnshtruar k\u00ebtij procesi, si dhe munges\u00eb gatishm\u00ebrie dhe korrekt\u00ebsie n\u00eb drejtim t\u00eb organeve t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit, duke mos p\u00ebrmbushur detyrimin ligjor p\u00ebr bashk\u00ebpunim.<\/p>\n
\u201c[\u2026]vler\u00ebsoj se shumica e trupit gjykues nuk duhet t\u00eb kishte bazuar vendimmarrjen e saj vet\u00ebm n\u00eb faktin q\u00eb subjekti i rivler\u00ebsimit kishte dal\u00eb n\u00eb pension pleq\u00ebrie, por duhet t\u00eb kishte analizuar q\u00ebndrimin e mbajtur prej saj deri n\u00eb momentin e p\u00ebrfitimit t\u00eb pensionit, i cili \u00ebsht\u00eb shoq\u00ebruar me nj\u00eb indiferenc\u00eb t\u00eb subjektit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit ndaj organeve t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit dhe tendenc\u00eb t\u00eb dukshme p\u00ebr t\u2019iu shmagur k\u00ebtij procesi\u201d, argumenton Mulaj.<\/p>\n
N\u00eb p\u00ebrfundim, pakica vler\u00ebson se, si Komisioni, ashtu edhe Kolegji duhej t\u00eb kishin disponuar me aplikimin e nenit G, pika 2 e Aneksit t\u00eb Kushtetut\u00ebs, duke i ndaluar Zhill\u00ebs rikthimin n\u00eb funksione n\u00eb sistemin e drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb p\u00ebr 15 vjet.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kolegji i Posa\u00e7\u00ebm i Apelimit, KPA u nda n\u00eb vler\u00ebsimin lidhur me p\u00ebrfundimin e procesit t\u00eb rivler\u00ebsimit ndaj ish-inspektores s\u00eb ish-K\u00ebshillit t\u00eb Lart\u00eb t\u00eb Drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb, Sofia Zhilla. Shumica e trupit gjykues t\u00eb KPA e p\u00ebrb\u00ebr\u00eb nga kryesuesja Rezarta Schuetz, relatorja Mimoza Tasi dhe an\u00ebtar\u00ebt Sokol \u00c7omo e Albana Shtylla, vler\u00ebsoi ta p\u00ebrmbyll\u00eb procesin pa nj\u00eb […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":637,"featured_media":79314,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[13,114],"tags":[292,497,112,1880],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/www.reporter.al\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/Trupa-e-KPA-gjate-nje-procesi.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"Trupa e Kolegjit t\u00eb Posa\u00e7\u00ebm t\u00eb Apelimit gjat\u00eb nj\u00eb procesi. Foto: Nensi Bogdani\/ BIRN. ","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/79313"}],"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=79313"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/79313\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":79315,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/79313\/revisions\/79315"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/79314"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=79313"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=79313"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reporter.al\/vetingu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=79313"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}