FLASH
Shkruar nga Pamfleti
4-5 MPs gather there and discuss the "destinies of the country", despite not having votes, the internationals have made it clear to them that they want transparency and, above all, inclusiveness...
The mystery continues to increase regarding what Edi Rama and Fatmir Xhafaj intend to achieve with the famous anti-corruption commission.
Although the entire judiciary boycotted it and they have no vote to change the key laws of justice, the work of this commission continues unabated and in complete secrecy. What has raised doubts is a meeting held yesterday shortly before the plenary session, a meeting held "on the sidelines".
As can be seen in the photos distributed by the Assembly, the meeting was held in a room in the building where the plenary sessions are held and a number of decisions were made quickly, without transparency. The meeting was not broadcast by the Assembly, while journalists were also not allowed to be present, since the meeting itself started in secret.
Meanwhile, the Assembly itself announces that: the Technical Secretariat informed about the draft Analytical Document (not final) prepared by the Group of High Level Experts, which contains a draft analysis of the current situation in the 3 areas subject to the commission's work: i) Good governance, ii) Anti-corruption and iii) Rule of Law.
This draft is said to be a work in progress and will be given to experts before it takes its final shape. This draft is the essence of this commission and there is complete terror for it. It is not known who is drafting it, how it is being drafted, etc.
The only announcement of the Assembly is that the analytical draft document is based mainly on the assessments, findings and recommendations expressed in the EU Reports, as well as a number of other official domestic and international reports and documents. The Draft Analytical Document is a voluminous material with 12 components/chapters and about 20 sub-components. But without giving details.
Also, it is emphasized that the Commission then reviewed 3 decisions of an organizational nature, prepared by the Technical Secretariat, which were approved by the members present at the meeting.
More specifically:
The first decision is related to the approval of the steps for the organization of the public consultation process, according to the measures proposed by the Group of High Level Experts and the Technical Secretariat, which includes: i) the organization of public thematic roundtables, ii) civic dialogue forums with focus on sensitive issues for citizens; iii) consultations with interest groups, including state institutions and law enforcement executive agencies; as well as iv) consulting the draft of the Analytical Document with international experts and consultants to receive their evaluations and comments regarding the compatibility with international standards, as well as reflecting the best international experiences in these fields.
The second decision is related to the approval of changes in the composition of the High Level Group of Experts.
The third decision is related to the approval of the list of external international experts and consultants, who will be attached to the Commission, to support and contribute to the fulfillment of the object of the special commission's activity.
For these last two there is zero transparency. Why did the commission change the composition of the group of experts and who are the names left or new? Also, nothing is known about external experts.
So it seems clear that we are dealing with an ominous scenario. 4-5 MPs gather there and discuss the "destinies of the country", despite not having votes, the internationals have made it clear that they want transparency and, above all, inclusiveness. Justice also boycotted them in the block and they continue. Why? / Pamphlet
Lini një Përgjigje