FLASH
Shkruar nga Pamfleti
The Special Anti-Corruption Court decided to leave the "prison arrest" measure in force for former President Ilir Meta a day ago and to reject his request for mitigation of the measure.
Arrested in October last year, Meta is in prison and is requesting the replacement of his security measure from arrest to prison with a lighter measure.
According to the statement of his lawyer, Kujtim Cakrani, Meta presented arguments before the judicial body as to why he is being unjustly held in prison, while also engaging in a debate with the special prosecutor.
Below are the submissions of former President Ilir Meta before the court in the court session on the revocation or replacement of the personal security measure.
1 – On page 3
II. The defendant Ilir Metaj and the person under investigation Monika Kryemadhi, have committed the criminal offense of "Passive corruption of high-ranking state officials and elected officials", after, based on the analysis of facts and evidence from ………….., they established contacts with their administrator, the person under investigation, Adrian Shatku.
Ilir Meta: This conclusion of the indictment is an expression of an assessment that is not only unprofessional and unsupported by any evidence or fact, at least for Mr. Meta, but also completely tendentious, even from all the submissions made by the prosecutors. There is no act or fact that proves that Mr. Meta has appointed or trusted Mr. Adrian Shatku as his administrator.
Likewise, there is no act or fact that Mr. Meta was aware that A. Shatku was his ex-wife's administrator and that they shared illegal or even legal benefits together.
2 – Page 3 last paragraph.
As a result of this activity and the abusive exercise of power, the parties have benefited from citizen A.SH and UNIFI, considerable income, including a percentage of the profit as well as being provided by A. Shatku several times with credit cards.
Ilir Meta: This conclusion is completely tendentious as there is no evidence or indication that Mr. Meta was aware of his ex-wife's illegal or legal benefits from A. Shatku.
The reference to percentage allocations on Ms. Kryemadhi's cell phone that SPAK claims is up to Ms. Kryemadhi to clarify.
Even more tendentious is the prosecutors' attempt to present Mr. Meta as a co-beneficiary or aware of the illegal cards alleged by the prosecution, which according to her are only in the name of Monika Kryemadhi, who according to SPAK, is also their beneficiary.
Mr. Meta was not only unaware of this illegal relationship, but after learning that after searching Ms. Kryemadhi's mother's apartment, there was such a card, but unused, according to Ms. Kryemadhi, he also decided to legally divorce her, considering it a serious breach of trust and the law for an experienced politician, but also to the detriment of his political causes.
Mr. Meta was only informed of the use of this card in San Marino by the prosecution in the first hearing after his arrest in Court.
While for the other two cards, he was only recognized as a defendant on the day the indictment was communicated, on May 27th.
Likewise, the prosecution itself proves that Monika Kryemadhi is the only user of this card.
3 – On page 5
Ilir Meta: Once again, we emphasize that the prosecution's attempts to "prove" from the findings on Ms. Monika Kryemadhi's mobile phone that the persons under investigation, Metaj-Kryemadhi, have benefited from % of the profit from the company UNIFI Holding Inc, from the interconnection agreement with Vodafone, are both unfounded and contradictory.
The charge: "This fact results from the communications that Monika has with Shatku where she addresses him with the expressions "we" and "Dhori's permission and mine."
It is clear that if this conversation is true, by "we" she means herself and her cousin Adrian Shatku.
As with the second part, if true, "mine" implies her interests and this does not at all prove Ilir Meta's involvement in this alleged percentage relationship nor his knowledge of such a relationship (as in the case of the cards).
4- On page 5.
Accusation: "Adrian Shatku is the trusted person of Ilir Meta and Monika Kryemadhi and, according to Fatime Kryemadhi's statement, also their distant cousin"
Ilir Meta: This conclusion is also tendentious, as the entire investigation shows that Adrian Shatku is a person close to Monika Kryemadhi, a native of Dibra, and Ema Shatku (Çoku), a close friend of Monika.
For these reasons, he was a person known and respected by Ilir Meta, but never his confidant nor aware of any of his illegal or suspicious activities.
5 – Page 5
Ilir Meta: To present this very "strong" connection between Ilir Meta and Adrian Shatku, the prosecution reflects the episode according to electronic communications that (according to page 71 of the prosecution's communication as defendant):
“On September 5, 2014, Monika informs Adrian that Iliri will go to Morocco on October 30-31, 2014 and tells him that “if you want to go and if you need a meeting with a minister – Iliri told me”. Adrian replies that he will go and that “…I will do the meeting with the PM…we will also meet the ministers of energy and telecommunications”
Ilir Meta: This episode shows not only that Monika informs Adrian about the Speaker of the Parliament's movements, but also that Adrian was very powerful in Morocco, taking it upon himself to arrange meetings with the PM (Prime Minister) and other ministers.
Atëherë përse i duhej ndihma e Kryetarit të Parlamentit të Shqipërisë në Marok, Adrianit, kur ishte kaq i lidhur me Kryeministrin e Marokut?
Siç dihet vizita ka qenë shtetërore dhe e bërë me të gjitha rregullat protokollare.
Përfshirja e episodeve të tilla kërkon në mënyrë të sforcuar të krijojë një lidhje të dyshimtë midis Ilir Metës dhe Adrian Shatkut e cila nuk ekziston në asnjë rrethanë.
6– Ilir Meta: Prokurorët në mënyrë absurde, përdorin një deklarim të shtetasit Eriol Braimllari, i cili është kushëri i Endrit Braimllarit, të dy të përfshirë në çështjen e lobimeve për të rrëzuar pretendimin sipas SPAK-ut, të të pandehurit Ilir Metaj se ai nuk ka asnjë lidhje me Adrian Shatkun.
Ilir Meta: Në përgjigje të pyetjeve të bëra më parë nga akuza, unë i kam bërë të qarta rrethanat e njohjes me Adrian Shatkun, ndaj kjo lojë fjalësh e prokurorëve është pa kuptim.
Nëse unë nuk kam patur asnjë lidhje të dyshimtë, të paligjshme, ky nuk është faji im, por merita e sjelljeve të mia përherë të përgjegjshme, të ligjshme dhe të moralshme.
Po kështu, shtetasin Eriol Braimllari mund ta pyesni nëse është takuar të paktën njëherë apo të paktën 100 herë me shtetasin Adrian Shatku në Tiranë apo edhe në Uashington edhe pa Kryetarin e Parlamentit. Për këtë mund t’ju ndihmojë edhe sistemi TIMS.
7- Ilir Meta: Lidhur me diferencat që i rezultojnë organit të akuzës për lobimet e LSI në SHBA, theksojmë se çdo veprim nga ana e Z. Meta dhe Kryesisë së LSI, deri në Prill 2017 kur Z. Meta u zëvendësua nga Z. Petrit Vasili si Kryetar i LSI, ka qenë në respekt të plotë të ligjeve shqiptare dhe amerikane.
Çdo marrëveshje miratohej në Kryesi dhe një titullar caktohej për të firmosur dhe ndjekur zbatimin e saj sipas klauzolave të rëna dakord me kompanitë përkatëse.
Z. Meta kurrë as nuk ka autorizuar e as nuk ka patur dijeni se një person apo kompani në Shqipëri apo SHBA ka bërë pagesa të padeklaruara, prat ë paligjshme për interes të LSI.
Po kështu, Z.Meta është i habitur se si kompani amerikane mund të pranojnë pagesa të tilla në shkelje të ligjeve amerikane dhe jemi të interesuar të dimë nëse dikush prej tyre po hetohet nga SHBA për këtë shkelje të ligjeve amerikane.
Po kështu, Z. Meta ju ka informuar dhe provuar, si në rastin e “McKeon Group”, për të cilën u bë një pagesë e ligjshme dhe e deklaruar prej 15 mijë $, se si ndërmjetësi, avokati greko-amerikan Fidetzis, kishte rregjistruar një marrëveshje në FARA në emër të LSI pa qenë i autorizuar nga LSI dhe kjo u denoncua nga vetë Z. Meta te Presidenti i “McKeon Group” dhe nga ky u njoftua FARA.
Lidhur me pretendimin e akuzës për marrëdhëniet e mia të ngushta me Znj. Ema Çoku (Shatku), kemi të bëjmë me një spekullim të qëllimshëm pasi ato kanë qenë mardhënie thjesht kortezie dhe aspak të afërta, për më tepër që ajo personalisht nuk ka qenë pjesë e strukturave drejtuese të Partisë së Lirisë (LSI), por kishte lidhje shoqërore dhe familjare me Znj. Kryemadhi.
Meanwhile, regarding Ilir Meta's other influences on episodes that result, according to SPAK, from telephone communications with Ms. Monika Kryemadhi or other persons, they are imaginary, speculative and untrue.
Likewise, we assess that SPAK continues to apply the standard of investigation against Mr. Meta at the same level as the standard of his arrest (kidnapping), outside of any objectivity and in serious violation of the Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights.
We appreciate the permission that SPAK granted Ms. Monika Kryemadhi in January of this year to visit the USA, where Mr. Adrian Shatku and representatives of the lobbying companies involved in this process are also present, but we fail to understand the insistence on keeping Mr. Meta in detention even after the investigations have been underway for a long time and have been postponed several times.
Therefore, we hope that the Court will put this investigation process on the tracks of the rule of law, especially since Mr. Meta is the President of the second opposition force in the country and there is no risk of his departure, as he has been under investigation for 6 years and on the day of his arrest (kidnapping) he was coming from Kosovo. /Top Channel/
Lini një Përgjigje