FLASH
Shkruar nga Pamfleti
The Special Prosecution Office has requested the dismissal of 23 requests submitted by former Minister of Health, Ilir Beqaj, through which he disputes the accusations brought against him, as well as a series of procedural actions carried out during the investigation.
At the hearing, prosecutor Edvin Kondili stated that all of Beqaj's claims are unfounded in law and that most of them were answered during the investigation phase, in the preliminary hearing, as well as in the court's decision that accepted the request to move the case to trial.
Regarding Beqaj's claim that the theft charge is not proven, the Special Prosecution Office assessed that the defendant has not presented concrete requests, but has raised questions that, according to it, have been clarified previously and will be addressed during the parties' final conclusions.
Regarding the request for the exclusion of electronic data seized from a computer and the invalidity of the relevant acts, SPAK argued that all procedural actions were carried out in accordance with the law.
The prosecution also opposed Beqaj's request for the invalidity of the procurement contract, arguing that the lack of the original document at the Ministry of Health does not invalidate the evidence.
The Special Prosecution Office asked the court not to accept any of the 23 requests submitted by Ilir Beqaj, insisting that they find no support in the law and that the issues raised by him have already been addressed in previous stages of the criminal proceedings.
"Ilir Beqaj's request for the invalidity of the act of notification of the accusation must be dismissed as it is not based on the law. The actions were approved by the preliminary judge, accepting the request for trial. Beqaj's claim that the charge of theft is not proven, we find that the defendant does not raise requests but asks questions, which have been clarified, and will be addressed during the final conclusions of the parties. Regarding the request for the exclusion of electronic data from a computer and the invalidity of the acts, we assess that they are procedural actions in accordance with the Law. Request 19, the charge of theft by abusing an invalid duty, we assess that the decision is based on the law. As for the sources of evidence and facts, the preliminary decision emphasizes precisely and extensively, where the value of the damage that the defendants have caused to the state is also emphasized. Request 20, the lack of the original procurement contract. The original contract was not found in the Ministry of Health, and this constitutes a violation, but it is "The unified contract in FSDKSH was filed, but the fact of not finding the original copy of the contract in the Ministry of Health, and on this claim that should not be considered valid evidence, we object and request the dismissal of the defendant's request," SPAK announces.
Lini një Përgjigje