FLASH
Shkruar nga Pamfleti
In the decision of GJKKO to confirm the measure against Ilir Beqaj, the court noted the fact that on November 27, 2014, the then Minister of Finance, Shkëlqim Cani, replied to the Minister of Health Ilir Beqaj and refused to approve the concession because according to the letter, the feasibility study had deficiencies in the documentation.
"Referred VKM no. 575/2013 "On the approval of the rules for evaluation and awarding by concession/public private partnership", (article 9) only projects that meet all the conditions set forth in this article can continue with the submission for approval to the Ministry of Finance in case request for financial support. We highlight here the fact that the feasibility study is not accompanied by the argumentation of the Contracting Authority for the concession/public private partnership, which must show the fulfillment of the conditions provided for in Article 9 of VKM no. 575/2013. We bring to your attention that one of the elements that the result of the feasibility study must contain is to show that: the alternative through which it is envisaged to complete the project through the awarding of a concession contract/PPP is more beneficial compared to the alternative of awarding a public procurement contract.
In the content of the feasibility study, we find that we do not have a clear argumentation regarding the analysis developed for reaching the conclusion that the concession/PPP is an economically more favorable procedure than public procurement, as well as the indicators that have been evaluated in accordance with the predictions made in VKM no. 575/2013. This comparative analysis must be carried out in a clear and distinct way for each service envisaged to be provided by concession/PPP", says Can's letter.
The court says in the decision that from the administered evidence it results that the same Feasibility Study was presented by the Minister of Health which was previously rejected for financing by the Ministry of Finance, as there is no clear argumentation regarding the analysis developed for reaching the conclusion that the concession/PPP is an economically more favorable procedure than public procurement, as well as the indicators that have been evaluated in accordance with the forecasts made in VKM no. 575/2013. Meanwhile, after the re-sent, Cani approved it.
"Also, it does not result that the Feasibility Study was changed and any changes were approved after the rejection by the Ministry of Finance. Under these conditions, when we are in front of the same Feasibility Study, it remains unclear what made the Minister of Finance, Mr. Sh. C. only 1 month and 15 days later, approving in principle the financing proposal with letter No. 16067/3 Prot., dated 12.01.2015. Likewise, the answer of the Ministry of Finance remains unclear regarding the fact that it looks at the documentation only from a "formal point of view". If the latter looks at the documentation from a formal point of view, can an unsigned document be considered formally in order? If he looked at the documentation from a formal point of view and the Feasibility Study was the same from a formal point of view, why did he reject it the first time from a (substantial) point of view?" evidenced by the GJKKO file.
The court appreciates that, Ilir Beqaj, in the capacity of the former Minister of Health, in approving the feasibility study and then submitting it for approval to the Ministry of Finance, as well as the former Minister of Finance Shkëlqim Cani in giving preliminary approval for the financing of the concession with of sterilization have acted contrary to the legal provisions.
Also, the Court would like to point out that if Shkëlqim Can and the persons under his authority (in a hierarchical manner) had exercised their powers in accordance with the legal and by-laws, in this particular case the economic damage would not have been caused ascertained by the Supreme State Audit in the values of about 460,000,000 ALL for the year 2017, and about 302,000,000 ALL for the year 2018.
"The court would like to emphasize that there are reasonable doubts based on evidence that the former Minister of Finance Shkëlqim Cani, in this particular case, acted intentionally, as there is no objective and legitimate reason for the same feasibility study within a time frame of 1 months and 15 days, to have two diametrically opposed answers.
"Former Minister of Finance Mr. Sh. C. has helped in the realization of the criminal intent of the person under investigation IB and his subordinates (persons under investigation in the same proceeding) for continuing to grant sterilization concessions to predetermined winners in violation of the law. In this particular case, the person under IB investigation served as a pusher, while Mr. Sh. C. in the role of assistant", says the decision of GJKKO.
Lini një Përgjigje