FLASH
Shkruar nga Pamfleti
Lawyer Sokol Hazizaj has signaled that several female deputies have been summoned to SPAK today. Without mentioning names, he has asked them to be careful in the statements they give, as SPAK does not call you in vain. He has explained from a legal perspective when a person is summoned for questioning.
Full post
A piece of advice, or whatever you like, for the girls or women MPs who were summoned to SPAK today.
It is good to be careful in your statements because this is a serious move and a signal that SPAK has initiated or is in charge of a criminal proceeding where these persons have knowledge or a possible role. But this does not necessarily mean that there are charges against you – at least not yet, because SPAK, from practice,
Calls for questions in several stages (KPP)
1. As persons with knowledge (witnesses) – most commonly at the beginning of investigations. SPAK may be pursuing another case (e.g. corruption or abuse of office in an institution under their jurisdiction), and they are called to clarify current/current facts or documents.
2. As persons under investigation (with status not yet published) – in some cases, SPAK initially interrogates them without making it public that they are "under investigation" in order to collect evidence or confront them with data.
3. As a signal for a more in-depth investigation – when the questions go beyond the usual institutional role, or involve their direct decision-making, which indicates that SPAK may or may not be building a larger file involving high-level political decisions, therefore,
It is very likely that the proceedings will continue, because it has already been proven that,
• SPAK does not summon current ministers without a strong reason – this happens after documents, evidence have been collected, or a series of procedural decisions/acts have been followed regarding suspicions…
• SPAK has shown that it does not stop at high-ranking figures because it has a case/object, so if it finds criminal elements, the proceedings against them may be further formalized.
4. But no less important, but even
Moreover, be careful, because the Leader performs some "work" on this occasion.
a. Reduces public pressure, because corruption allegations have created strong public pressure, both domestically and from international partners.
An organized "cleansing" after the elections will:
b. It seems like a serious reaction to corruption.
c. He restores control of the political narrative to himself and maintains power without high costs.
Also, by allowing SPAK to investigate and "hit" several ministers or former ministers, the Leader achieves this by sacrificing several figures, but protects the power structure, appearing as a reformer, without compromising himself.
He "pave the way" for a new political generation, which he himself chooses and controls.
d. It gains political capital in the eyes of the international community because the EU and the US legitimize a new mandate for the "SP".
dh. It prevents internal rifts in the "SP", because some "old figures" are more of a burden/encumbrance than a political asset.
So Goca, I'm not going to go into detail because I have many other legal reasons that I'm not telling you about, but I'll let you know in person/up close, so:
Be careful with statements in any status!!!
Lini një Përgjigje