FLASH
Shkruar nga Pamfleti
The next hearing is being held at the Criminal Court against former Minister of Health, Ilir Beqaj, in the context of the Sterilization case.
During this hearing, Beqaj no longer stood in the defendants' cage, but sat next to his lawyers. He was escorted into the courtroom by Prison Police forces.
In the May 21 session, the former minister had submitted 16 preliminary requests. Today, before the trial panel, he requested the exclusion of some digital evidence, arguing that it conflicts with the Criminal Procedure Code, international conventions, as well as decisions of the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court.
Beqaj also raised doubts about SPAK's digital laboratory, claiming that it lacks the necessary international accreditations and standards for the administration of electronic evidence.
"I request that some digital evidence be excluded, as it contradicts the Criminal Procedure Code, international conventions, the unifying decision of the Supreme Court and two decisions of the Constitutional Court. I have reservations about the SPAK laboratory. The SPAK digital laboratory has no accreditation, no ISO standards and we do not know which entity certified it. We have asked about this standard, but we have not received an answer," said Beqaj.
Beqaj's 9 new demands:
1. During the investigation phase, the defense has submitted 25 different memoranda to the prosecution. The vast majority of these memoranda have not only received a response after the 15-day deadline set by the Code of Criminal Procedure, but all have received a response after the indictment was announced. The vast majority have received a negative response, including the rejection of requests for additional investigations and the request that the prosecution collect evidence in favor of Ilir Beqaj's innocence. Some requests have received a response after 100 days. Since the due process of law has been clearly violated, a stay of the trial is requested.
2. All digital evidence obtained from electronic devices and in electronic mail has been administered illegally and in violation of:
* Budapest Convention, ratified by Law No. 8888
* Articles 208/a and 209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
* The jurisprudence of the Supreme Court (unified decision of 2021, Lapsi.al case)
* The jurisprudence of the Court of First Instance, decisions of 2025, the E. Qyno case and the O. Ymeraj case
* The ECHR manual and guide on digital evidence.
Meanwhile, for more than 10 months, SPAK has not responded to the defense of I. Beqaj, regarding the accreditation of the SPAK laboratory and the ISO Digital Forensic standards used by this laboratory.
The exclusion of all illegally administered digital evidence is requested.
3. The accusation is also based on a document called Annex 5 of the concession contract. This document is neither signed nor sealed by the contracting parties. It does not even appear to have been signed by the concession commission that negotiated the draft contract and signed it page by page. The exclusion of this evidence is requested.
4. In the Criminal Code of the Republic of Albania, the charge of theft does not meet the principles of legality because it does not define the prohibited conduct. In addition, theft always occurs without the consent of the owner whose property is reduced. This is not written in the Criminal Code. The Contracting Authority knowingly pays the Concessionaire without being deceived or threatened. Consequently, the dismissal of the criminal case is requested.
5. The prosecution claims that the detailed indictment is the reasoned decision of the Criminal Court. Since, according to the latter, there is no original contract between the parties, the indictment is not based on evidence, therefore, the dismissal of the criminal case is requested.
6. The prosecution claims that the detailed indictment is the reasoned decision of the Criminal Court. Since, according to the latter, there is no calculated value of the theft, the accusation is based on something that has not been proven, therefore, the dismissal of the criminal case is requested.
7. The prosecution claims that the detailed indictment is the reasoned decision of the Criminal Court. According to the latter, the indictment against Ilir Beqaj is based on his profession, his character and his behavior during the hearings. The behavior during the hearings is behavior after the alleged criminal offense was committed. For this reason, the dismissal of the criminal case is requested.
8. The prosecution claims that the detailed indictment is the reasoned decision of the Judicial Council. According to the latter, a public procurement should have been carried out and not a concession tender, thus entering into the exclusive prerogatives of the executive branch. For this reason, the dismissal of the criminal case is requested.
9. It is requested to establish the illegality and consequently the invalidity of the interim decision on the division of the case dated 28.05.2025, fundamental registration no. 66, registration date 03.02.2025. The judicial panel never expressed its opinion on the preliminary requests that I. Beqaj submitted before that panel. For this reason, the dismissal of the criminal case is requested.
Lini një Përgjigje