FLASH
Shkruar nga Pamfleti
The Sterilization Concession has brought clashes between the ministers of the "Rama" cabinet. The SPAK file also contains several communications between the Minister of Health at the time, Ilir Beqja, and the Minister of Finance of the same period, Shkëlqim Cani, where the latter initially refuses to approve the concession and then agrees, which according to the prosecution raises doubts.
On October 10, 2014, Beqaj sent a letter to Can, informing him of the start of the concession procedure/public private partnership for the integrated services of providing a personalized set of surgical instruments, as well as the treatment of biological waste and the disinfection of surgical rooms . While asking Can for the approval of the project, Beqja also attached the feasibility study and financial statements.
But according to the court decision, both the feasibility study and the financial statements sent by the Ministry of Health are unsigned by the members of the Commission. Ten days later, Minister Beqja sent another letter to his colleague Shkëlqim Cani with some additional information regarding the concession, reminding him that the project is within the budget ceilings of this ministry and does not require additional funds. The answer of the Minister of Finance, Shkëlqim Cani, came fully 40 days later, on November 27, 2014.
"We note the fact that the feasibility study is not accompanied by the arguments of the Contracting Authority for the granting of the concession/public private partnership, which must show the fulfillment of the conditions provided for in Article 9 of VKM...", it is said, among other things, in Can's letter, what would force Minister Beqja to start another explanatory letter addressed to the Minister of Finance. 20 days later, Beqja has launched additional information on Finances where he also attached the financial statements that, as he says, "were carefully reviewed by the working group to better reflect a balance between expenses and projected revenues, based on the feasibility study ". But according to the prosecution, a large part of the additional information related to the argumentation for granting the concession is unsigned. On January 12, 2015, Shkelqim Cani estimates that the concession is favorable for the state and as such should be approved. But the question marks of the Prosecution are many after this answer of Can.
Prosecution questions:
"The Ministry of Health presented the same feasibility study which was previously rejected for funding by the Ministry of Finance as there is no clear argument regarding the analysis developed to reach the conclusion that the concession/PPP is the most economically advantageous procedure than public procurement. 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 becomes unclear what made the Ministry of Finance change its mind only 1 month and 15 days later, approving the financing proposal in principle. Also, 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 it only 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", it is stated in the arguments of the Prosecution disclosed in the court's decision.
Lini një Përgjigje