FLASH
Shkruar nga Pamfleti
After the Constitutional Court accepted the claim of the complainant Arben Ahmetaj, former Deputy Prime Minister, for the violation of the right to private property, it was the Special Court of Appeals, which, under the legal obligation of the CC and trying to respect the deadlines, decided a few days ago that the issue of proportionality in the violation of the right to private property should be decided at the conclusion of the trial of the case on the merits.
This decision and this approach are in open contradiction with the orientation of the Constitutional Court. Which seriously violates not only the independence of the judicial system but also shows best that the decisions are made according to the instructions of the party or powerful party exponents who control the justice system and are intended to hit not only the opposition but also those within the majority who have had the courage to denounce the abuses of Rama and those around him.
Explanations:
On the decision of the Special Court of Appeal, after being returned for review by the Constitutional Court
On 18.02.2025, the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Albania considered in a plenary session, without the presence of the parties, the individual complaint of Mr. Arben Ahmetaj, with the subject:
“1- The repeal as incompatible with the Constitution of decisions No. 296 act, dated 17.07.2023 of the Special Court of First Instance for Corruption and Organized Crime, No. 37 (87-2023-172) decision, dated 10/08/2023 of the Special Court of Appeal for Corruption and Organized Crime and of decision No. 00 – 2023 – 2048 of the Decision, dated 07.12.2023 of the Criminal Chamber of the High Court, due to the violation of the applicant's property right and the right to have a reasoned judicial decision.
2- Sending the case for retrial to the Special Court of First Instance for Corruption and Organized Crime.”
At the end of the review of the appeal, with decision no. 20, dated 11.04.2025, the Constitutional Court decided:
"1. Partial acceptance of the request.
2. The repeal as incompatible with the Constitution of decisions No. 37 (87-2023-172) decision, dated 10/08/2023 of the Special Court of Appeal for Corruption and Organized Crime and No. 00 – 2023 – 2048 of the Decision, dated 07.12.2023 of the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court, as incompatible with the Constitution, in the part related to the seizure of assets:
- Apartment no. 7/434+1-1, cadastral area 8380, “Reshit Çollaku” street, Tirana.
- Bank account no. 44333535101, at “Intesa San Paolo Bank”.
- Deposit no. 443335DT1Y01, at “Intesa San Paolo Bank”.
3. Sending the case for review to the Special Court of Appeal for Corruption and Organized Crime...”
The Constitutional Court accepted the appellant's claim for the infringement of the right to private property, in violation of the constitutional standard of reasoning of judicial decisions. Recognizing this infringement of the procedural aspect of the case (para. 55) and after identifying inherent contradictions in the judicial decisions (paras. 50-51), the Constitutional Court directed that in the retrial the issue of the infringement of private property be viewed also in its substantive aspect, by analyzing and verifying to what extent the value of the seized property corresponded to the proceeds of the criminal offense obtained by the appellant, according to the accusation.
This verification, as the Constitutional Court emphasized, could only be carried out by ordinary courts, due to its limited jurisdiction in assessing evidence (para. 54), directing that the violation of the right be remedied by the Special Court of Appeal.
The Special Court of Appeal scheduled the hearing for 11.06.2025, but the hearing did not take place due to the absence of the prosecutor Mr. Maksuti. It postponed the court hearing and reviewed the case on 14.06.2025, in the presence of the parties, but made no attempt to evaluate the evidence in terms of the principle of proportionality, which must be respected in the case when the right to private property is violated. The only concern of the Special Court of Appeal was the conclusion of the process within the 15-day period from the receipt of the acts regulated by Article 249.8 of the CPC! This concern did not make sense, since after two years, the only interest affected was the violation of the applicant's right to private property, whose defense was in no hurry, but requested verification of the facts and their judicial investigation, according to the orientation of the Constitutional Court.
Despite this, the Special Court of Appeal, with monocratic judge Mr. Dhimitër Lara (the previous trial in the Appeal, with the same subject, was conducted by Ms. Igerta Hysi), heard only the claims of the defense and the objections of the prosecutor; the latter, expressed only the suspicion that the defendant “may have hidden accounts” and that, to this end, they were waiting for a response to a registered letter from Switzerland.
During the interventions in the debate, the concept of that Court clearly emerged, that the issue of proportionality in the violation of the right to private property should be decided at the conclusion of the trial of the case on the merits, in open contradiction to the orientation of the Constitutional Court.
After withdrawing, the Court read only the enacting clause of the decision, deciding the same as in the previous trial before that Court - approving decision No. 296 act, dated 17.07.2023 of the Special Court of First Instance for Corruption and Organized Crime.
The reasoned decision has not yet been made available to the parties. / Syri
Lini një Përgjigje