FLASH
Shkruar nga Anila Hoxha
Although she was left in charge of an institution dubbed the Albanian FBI, Aida Hajnaj is leading until the end of her five-year term (August 31, 2025) a BKH that was first criticized by its own...
In this article, I will not address at all the possibility of whether or not Ms. Aida Hajnaj will be reappointed as head of the National Bureau of Investigation. The chances of this happening are ZERO. More precisely, this will absolutely not happen. Since I started by counting from zero, I am listing according to the facts / law / what has happened so far, how a process for the new head of the BKH risks being carried out in violation of the law. A SPAK-BKH-KLP triangle that sometimes reads the law without acting and sometimes coordinates in procrastination and actions; once again exposes the crisis of institutional communication and that may bring repeated precedents.
But also a culture of appropriation of the law, the duty and the equally unimportance of the vote of collegial bodies. A BKH director who comes in September 2025 and (as of this date) a former BKH director who, from the documents, implies that she is getting ready to go to the courts, perhaps to be paid in parallel as two former general police directors who receive a salary at the same time as the appointee.
This is what the KLP members should have considered and seen when Ms. Aida Hajnaj requested reappointment, or they should have raised their cards and voted "NO, ma'am, you cannot be reappointed and you cannot stay when they don't want you", or they should have raised their cards and said "No, SPAK, there is no competition".
Why didn't they want Aida Hajnaj from the beginning?
1) Although she was entrusted with an institution dubbed the Albanian FBI, Aida Hajnaj is leading until the end of her five-year mandate (August 31, 2025) a BKH that was first criticized by her own people. I am talking about the people of SPAK and recently with the opportunism and inaction of the High Prosecutorial Council (11 members), who used every instrument to ignore and question the competencies of a BKH director, who is in fact a police officer with an unquestionable career for integrity and honesty. And this happened by special prosecutors and with them 11 members of the KLP, including those with mandates, who from the first day she took office, fought her dishonestly and with labels. These latter ones, not giving answers during 5 years, for the problems she encountered as director of the BKH, although the KLP is supposedly the government of prosecutors.
Why they didn't want THAT, they never explained it face to face.
2) It is certain that Mrs. Hajnaj is not naive to have not understood this climate of refusal to accept, to cooperate. And yet she tried; with the law in hand, article 33 that gives the director of the National Bureau of Investigation the right that after a 5-year mandate the legislator guarantees "the right to reappointment once".
She rolls the dice. She asks in December 2024 to be reappointed.
The request is filed with the KLP. The law states that the appointment and reappointment process is carried out by the KLP. But the Council follows it and delegates the right to this process to SPAK. Because both parties read the same article (33), but each interprets the fragment that suits them.
KLP takes into account that the recruitment takes place by a commission set up by SPAK and then the candidate's recommendation is suggested to KLP. Hajnaj takes into account that the reappointment is not a competition, as is happening and from this only one name is proposed to the council. Which of course, logically will not be the name of Mrs. Hajnaj
3) Re-appointment or competition are two different concepts. The legislator has never written at least re-appointment with competition! Nor competition with re-appointment.
Even the legislator, ironically, has not foreseen what procedures are followed for such a situation when the director of the BKH's mandate ends and requests reappointment. Despite the gap, the KLP takes on the role of the Constitutional Court, interprets the legal vacuum and in the meantime, two other requests of director Hajnaj (February-March) are shown as competent for the SPAK process.
Ironically, his offices are in the same building as the director of BKH.
It is understandable that the Special Prosecution Office has no communication with the director of the BKH, nor does the latter, and this is made uninterpretable by the trail of letters going back and forth between the three institutions.
4) Without a "yes" or "no" from the KLP and after four months of no solution, after the KLP delegated the process to SPAK on April 22, the competition is publicly opened for interested parties. But SPAK is also afraid of the law and therefore the process is publicly titled RE-APPOINTMENT. However, inside the packaging, everything that is wrapped as RE-APPOINTMENT is a competition starting from the application to the seven-stage test that interested parties will undergo.
The deadline for those interested in being filtered is May 7. Undoubtedly, a new leader with integrity and professionalism will be selected from this competition, so I take this opportunity to congratulate him first. Even though HE has not yet taken office, this shadow cast by two institutions will follow him throughout his mandate.
5) The last event was the KLP meeting (DATE 29 APRIL). When SPAK made the public announcement about the “re-appointment”, KLP included in the agenda another request by Aida Hajnaj (dated 29 April), who had requested information on the names of the three commissioners (of SPAK) who would oversee the seemingly transparent process. Here, KLP concluded that there was nothing to discuss and therefore distributed a copy-paste of SPAK’s public announcement with the names of the commission. Unfortunately, the title of the reappointment competition was also there, but KLP did not notice it, again it seems.
6) But, on the same day, another letter from Aida Hajnaj (deposited the day before the meeting) was not included in the agenda, in which concerns were raised about the situation, the bias of the commission and, among other things, the request for the suspension of the process until the end of the election campaign. This will be reviewed in another meeting, perhaps as long as the 11 honorable members of the KLP are considered, who most certainly, when this sweaty process for them is over (why are they afraid of SPAK?) will not think so long about the new name of the new head of the BKH.
PS Whoever you are, esteemed new director, I know that you cannot investigate and therefore refer to the Council on your own initiative. And not because they are a collegial body and make collegial decisions.
Lini një Përgjigje