![\"\"](\"https:\/\/hashtag.al\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/01\/endrit-dokle.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Prokuroria e Kruj\u00ebs ka ankimuar vendimin e Gjykat\u00ebs p\u00ebr lirimin\u00a0 nga burgu t\u00eb ish-pjes\u00ebtarit t\u00eb band\u00ebs s\u00eb Durr\u00ebsit Endrit Dokle.<\/span><\/p>\n N\u00eb arsyetimin e saj Prokuroria e Kruj\u00ebs deklaron se ka k\u00ebrkuar p\u00ebrjashtimin e gjyqtares Enkelejda Hoxha. Po k\u00ebshtu thuhet se nuk lejohet lirimi me kusht p\u00ebr t\u00eb d\u00ebnuar p\u00ebrs\u00ebrit\u00ebs dhe p\u00ebr t\u00eb d\u00ebnuarit p\u00ebrjet\u00eb.<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cK\u00ebrkuesi nuk ka p\u00ebrmbushur kriterin formal, q\u00eb k\u00ebrkon neni 65 i Kodit Penal, lidhur me koh\u00ebn efektive t\u00eb vuajtjes s\u00eb d\u00ebnimit, sepse p\u00ebrrllogaritjes s\u00eb periudh\u00ebs s\u00eb d\u00ebnimit t\u00eb vuajtur nga i d\u00ebnuari deri m\u00eb dat\u00ebn e raportit (n\u00eb dit\u00eb, muaj, vite) jan\u00eb p\u00ebrkat\u00ebsisht 25 vjet e 6 muaj e dhjet\u00eb dit\u00eb duk\u00eb p\u00ebrfshir\u00eb periudh\u00ebn e amnistis\u00eb e njohur me vendim gjykate p\u00ebrkat\u00ebsisht 4 vite. Sipas ligjas n\u00eb mas\u00ebn e d\u00ebnimit t\u00eb vuajtur nuk llogaritet koha e p\u00ebrfituar me amnisti ose falje. Pra p\u00ebr sa m\u00eb sip\u00ebr nuk provohet e plot\u00ebsuar kushti kryesor e cila p\u00ebrb\u00ebn nj\u00eb parakusht procedurial pa t\u00eb cil\u00ebn gjykata nuk mund t\u00eb analizoj\u00eb arsyet e ve\u00e7anta q\u00eb t\u00eb legjitimojn\u00eb lirimin e tij p\u00ebrpara se t\u00eb p\u00ebrfundoj\u00eb d\u00ebnimin e dh\u00ebn\u00eb p\u00ebr t\u00eb<\/em>\u201d-thuhet n\u00eb shkaqet e ankimimit t\u00eb Prokuroris\u00eb.<\/span><\/p>\n Deklarata e plot\u00eb:<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Njoftim n\u00eb lidhje me shkaqet e ankimit q\u00eb Prokuroria pran\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Shkall\u00ebs s\u00eb Par\u00eb Kruj\u00eb ka b\u00ebr\u00eb ndaj vendimit nr.6\/123 dat\u00eb 14.01.2020 t\u00eb dh\u00ebn\u00eb nga Gjykata e Shkall\u00ebs s\u00eb Par\u00eb Kruj\u00eb n\u00eb lidhje me k\u00ebrkes\u00ebn p\u00ebr lirimin me kusht t\u00eb d\u00ebnuarit Endrit Dokle<\/span><\/p>\n Brenda afatit ligjor organi i akuz\u00ebs ka ushtruar ankim ndaj vendimit nr.6\/123 dat\u00eb 14.01.2020 t\u00eb dh\u00ebn\u00eb nga Gjykata e Shkall\u00ebs s\u00eb Par\u00eb Kruj\u00eb, duke rezervuar t\u00eb drejt\u00ebn p\u00ebr t\u00eb plot\u00ebsuar ankimin pasi t\u00eb njihet me arsyetimin, duke parashtruar shkaqet p\u00ebr sa m\u00eb posht\u00eb vijon:<\/span><\/p>\n N\u00eb lidhje me shkeljet proceduriale:<\/span><\/strong> K\u00ebshtu, ajo ka theksuar se n\u00eb kuptim t\u00eb nenit 42\/2 t\u00eb Kushtetut\u00ebs, ekzistojn\u00eb dy teste p\u00ebr t\u00eb vler\u00ebsuar n\u00ebse nj\u00eb gjykat\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb e paanshme: i pari, konsiston n\u00eb p\u00ebrcaktimin e bindjes personale t\u00eb gjyqtarit n\u00eb nj\u00eb \u00e7\u00ebshtje konkrete. Nd\u00ebrsa testi i dyt\u00eb lidhet me vler\u00ebsimin n\u00ebse gjyqtari ka ofruar garanci t\u00eb mjaftueshme p\u00ebr t\u00eb p\u00ebrjashtuar \u00e7do dyshim t\u00eb ligjsh\u00ebm n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb drejtim. P\u00ebrjashtimi i k\u00ebtyre dyshimeve \u00ebsht\u00eb garanci p\u00ebr besimin q\u00eb duhet t\u00eb frym\u00ebzojn\u00eb gjykatat n\u00eb nj\u00eb shoq\u00ebri demokratike p\u00ebr publikun dhe mbi t\u00eb gjitha, p\u00ebr pal\u00ebt n\u00eb procesin gjyq\u00ebsor (Shih vendimin nr.18\/2007 t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs Kushtetuese).<\/span><\/p>\n P\u00ebrsa i perket testit t\u00eb objektivitetit Gjykata e Strasburgut ka theksuar n\u00eb c\u00ebshtjen deklaroi Fey kund\u00ebr Austris\u00eb se: \u201cN\u00eb baz\u00eb t\u00eb testit t\u00eb objektivitetit duhet t\u00eb p\u00ebrcaktohet n\u00ebse, p\u00ebrve\u00e7 faktit t\u00eb sjelljes personale t\u00eb gjyqtarit, ekzistojne fakte t\u00eb v\u00ebrtetueshme q\u00eb mund t\u00eb ngren\u00eb dyshime p\u00ebrsa i perket paanshmeris\u00eb s\u00eb t\u0133\u201d Faktet t\u00eb cilat iu parashtruan gjykat\u00ebs ishin t\u00eb mjaftueshme dhe t\u00ebr\u00ebsisht t\u00eb verifikueshme si p\u00ebr faktin e dh\u00ebnies s\u00eb vendimeve n\u00eb favor t\u00eb k\u00ebrkuesit ashtu dhe t\u00eb koh\u00ebs s\u00eb dh\u00ebnies s\u00eb tyre. N\u00eb rastin konkret gjyqtarja nuk ofronte garanci p\u00ebr t\u00eb qen\u00eb e panashme.<\/span><\/p>\n Nd\u00ebrsa n\u00eb lidhje me efektet q\u00eb sjell shkelja e parimit t\u00eb procesit t\u00eb rregullt ligjor sjellim n\u00eb v\u00ebmendje \u00e7\u00ebshtjen Karttunen kund\u00ebr Finland\u00ebs, ku Gjykata u shpreh se n\u00ebse rastet p\u00ebr p\u00ebrjashtimin e nj\u00eb gjyqtari jan\u00eb p\u00ebrcaktuar shprehimisht n\u00eb ligj, gjykata duhet t\u2019i konsideroj\u00eb ex officio k\u00ebto raste dhe duhet t\u00eb z\u00ebv\u00ebnd\u00ebsoj\u00eb an\u00ebtarin e trupit gjykues p\u00ebr t\u00eb cilin gj\u00ebndet nj\u00eb nga k\u00ebto raste.Nj\u00eb gjyq i cili zhvillohet me pjes\u00ebmarrjen e nj\u00eb gjyqtari, p\u00ebr t\u00eb cilin u gjend\u00ebn raste skualifikimi, nuk mund t\u00eb konsiderohet i drejt\u00eb. P\u00ebr t\u00eb vendosur n\u00ebse n\u00eb nj\u00eb \u00e7\u00ebshtje konkrete ekzistojn\u00eb apo jo arsye p\u00ebr t\u00eb besuar se nj\u00eb gjyqtar mund t\u00eb mos jet\u00eb i paansh\u00ebm, q\u00ebndrimi i k\u00ebrkuesit \u00ebsht\u00eb i r\u00ebnd\u00ebsish\u00ebm por jo vendimtar. Vendimtar \u00ebsht\u00eb fakti n\u00ebs\u00eb kjo frik\u00eb mund t\u00eb justifikohet objektivisht.<\/span><\/p>\n Pik\u00ebrisht faktet e m\u00ebsip\u00ebrme Prokuroria kishte humbur besimin se kjo \u00e7\u00ebshtje mund t\u00eb gjykohet n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb t\u00eb paanshme nga kjo gjyqtare.<\/span> N\u00eb kuadrin e parimeve kushtetuese q\u00eb q\u00ebndrojn\u00eb n\u00eb themel t\u00eb nj\u00eb procesi t\u00eb rregullt gjyq\u00ebsor, respektimi i parimit t\u00eb paanshm\u00ebris\u00eb mund\u00ebson krijimin e besimit tek gjyq\u00ebsori me q\u00ebllim q\u00eb drejt\u00ebsia jo vet\u00ebm t\u00eb b\u00ebhet, por dhe t\u00eb shihet q\u00eb po b\u00ebhet. \u00cbsht\u00eb pik\u00ebrisht kjo munges\u00eb e besimit tek pal\u00ebt q\u00eb mund t\u00eb \u00e7oj\u00eb n\u00eb krijimin e bindjes tek ta se nuk do t\u00eb ken\u00eb nj\u00eb proces t\u00eb rregullt ligjor, pasi ky gjyqtar nuk arrin ta p\u00ebr\u00e7oj\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb siguri si n\u00eb rastin konkret dhe c\u00ebnon gjith\u00eb procesin dhe vendimammarjen.<\/span><\/p>\n Nj\u00eb nga alternativat e d\u00ebnimit me burgim \u00ebsht\u00eb \u201cLirimi me kusht\u201d. K\u00ebshtu, n\u00eb nenin 64 t\u00eb Kodit Penal parshikohet shprehimisht se: \u201cI d\u00ebnuari me burgim mund t\u00eb lirohet me kusht, nga vuajtja e d\u00ebnimit vet\u00ebm p\u00ebr arsye t\u00eb ve\u00e7anta n\u00ebse me sjelljen dhe pun\u00ebn e tij tregon se me d\u00ebnimin e vuajtur i \u00ebsht\u00eb arritur q\u00ebllimit p\u00ebr edukimin e tij, si dhe t\u00eb ket\u00eb vuajtur: \u2013 jo m\u00eb pak se gjysm\u00ebn e d\u00ebnimit t\u00eb dh\u00ebn\u00eb p\u00ebr kund\u00ebrvajtje penale; \u2013 jo m\u00eb pak se dy t\u00eb tretat e d\u00ebnimit t\u00eb dh\u00ebn\u00eb p\u00ebr krime me masa d\u00ebnimi gjer n\u00eb pes\u00eb vjet burgim; \u2013 jo m\u00eb pak se tre t\u00eb kat\u00ebrtat e d\u00ebnimit t\u00eb dh\u00ebn\u00eb p\u00ebr krime me masa d\u00ebnimi mbi 5 vjet deri n\u00eb maksimumin e parashikuar nga ligji, me p\u00ebrjashtim t\u00eb parashikimeve n\u00eb paragrafin 3 t\u00eb k\u00ebtij neni. N\u00eb mas\u00ebn e d\u00ebnimit t\u00eb vuajtur nuk llogaritet koha e p\u00ebrfituar me amnisti ose falje. Nuk lejohet lirimi me kusht p\u00ebr t\u00eb d\u00ebnuarin p\u00ebrs\u00ebrit\u00ebs p\u00ebr krime t\u00eb kryera me dashje si dhe p\u00ebr t\u00eb d\u00ebnuarit p\u00ebr kryerjen e veprave penale t\u00eb parashikuara n\u00eb nenet 78\/a, 79\/a, 79\/b, 79\/c apo paragrafi i tret\u00eb i nenit 100. Lirimi me kusht revokohet nga gjykata, kur i d\u00ebnuari p\u00ebr nj\u00eb vep\u00ebr penale t\u00eb kryer me dashje, gjat\u00eb koh\u00ebs s\u00eb kushtit, kryen nj\u00eb vep\u00ebr tjet\u00ebr penale me dashje, duke u zbatuar dispozitat p\u00ebr bashkimin e d\u00ebnimeve. Gjykata e urdh\u00ebron t\u00eb d\u00ebnuarin t\u00eb mbaj\u00eb kontakte me Sh\u00ebrbimin e Prov\u00ebs gjat\u00eb periudh\u00ebs s\u00eb prov\u00ebs dhe t\u00eb p\u00ebrmbush\u00eb nj\u00eb ose disa nga detyrimet e parashikuara n\u00eb nenin 60 t\u00eb k\u00ebtij Kodi. Kur i d\u00ebnuari nuk mban kontakte me Sh\u00ebrbimin e Prov\u00ebs ose kur nuk i p\u00ebrmbush detyrimet e parashikuara n\u00eb nenin 60 t\u00eb k\u00ebtij Kodi, t\u00eb urdh\u00ebruara nga gjykata, kjo e fundit vendos z\u00ebvend\u00ebsimin e d\u00ebnimit t\u00eb par\u00eb me nj\u00eb d\u00ebnim tjet\u00ebr, zgjatjen e afatit t\u00eb mbik\u00ebqyrjes gjat\u00eb periudh\u00ebs s\u00eb prov\u00ebs ose revokimin e vendimin p\u00ebr lirimin para kohe me kusht.\u201d Nd\u00ebrsa sipas nenit 65 t\u00eb kodit penal kushtet e tjera jan\u00eb jan\u00eb: \u2013 t\u00eb ket\u00eb vuajtur jo m\u00eb pak se 35 vite burgim;- gjat\u00eb vuajtjes s\u00eb d\u00ebnimit ka mbajtur sjellje shembullore; \u00e7mohet se i \u00ebsht\u00eb arritur q\u00ebllimit t\u00eb d\u00ebnimit p\u00ebr edukimin e tij. Nga p\u00ebrmbajtja e k\u00ebsyre dispozitave q\u00eb rregullojn\u00eb institutin e lirimit me kusht rezulton se nj\u00eb nga kushtet thelb\u00ebsore p\u00ebr aplikimin e lirimit me kusht \u00ebsht\u00eb plot\u00ebsimi i koh\u00ebs s\u00eb vuajtjes s\u00eb d\u00ebnimit dhe identifikimi i \u201carsyeve t\u00eb ve\u00e7anta\u201d apo \u201csjellja sh\u00ebmbullore\u201d q\u00eb tregojn\u00eb se me sjelljen dhe pun\u00ebn e tij, i d\u00ebnuari tregon se me d\u00ebnimin e vuajtur i \u00ebsht\u00eb arritur q\u00ebllimit p\u00ebr edukimin e tij.<\/span><\/p>\n \u200bN\u00eb lidhje m\u00eb periudh\u00ebn e vuajtjes s\u00eb d\u00ebnimit vler\u00ebsojme se:<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n K\u00ebrkuesi nuk ka p\u00ebrmbushur kriterin formal, q\u00eb k\u00ebrkon neni 65 i Kodit Penal, lidhur me koh\u00ebn efektive t\u00eb vuajtjes s\u00eb d\u00ebnimit, sepse p\u00ebrrllogaritjes s\u00eb periudh\u00ebs s\u00eb d\u00ebnimit t\u00eb vuajtur nga i d\u00ebnuari deri m\u00eb dat\u00ebn e raportit (n\u00eb dit\u00eb, muaj, vite) jan\u00eb p\u00ebrkat\u00ebsisht 25 vjet e 6 muaj e dhjet\u00eb dit\u00eb duk\u00eb p\u00ebrfshir\u00eb periudh\u00ebn e amnistis\u00eb e njohur me vendim gjykate p\u00ebrkat\u00ebsisht 4 vite. Sipas ligjas n\u00eb mas\u00ebn e d\u00ebnimit t\u00eb vuajtur nuk llogaritet koha e p\u00ebrfituar me amnisti ose falje. Pra p\u00ebr sa m\u00eb sip\u00ebr nuk provohet e plot\u00ebsuar kushti kryesor e cila p\u00ebrb\u00ebn nj\u00eb parakusht procedurial pa t\u00eb cil\u00ebn gjykata nuk mund t\u00eb analizoj\u00eb arsyet e ve\u00e7anta q\u00eb t\u00eb legjitimojn\u00eb lirimin e tij p\u00ebrpara se t\u00eb p\u00ebrfundoj\u00eb d\u00ebnimin e dh\u00ebn\u00eb p\u00ebr t\u00eb. Lirimi me kusht \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb institut q\u00eb vlen si mjet i jasht\u00ebzakonsh\u00ebm i nd\u00ebrprejes s\u00eb m\u00ebtejshme t\u00eb d\u00ebnimit, vet\u00ebm n\u00eb rastet e parashikuara n\u00eb ligj t\u00eb cilat vler\u00ebsohen dhe konsiderohen prej Gjykat\u00ebs n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb kumulative. N\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb kuptim, \u00e7do i d\u00ebnuar n\u00eb parim, do t\u00eb duhet t\u00eb vuaj\u00eb d\u00ebnimin e plot\u00eb sikurse ka vendosur gjykata dhe vet\u00ebm p\u00ebrjashtimisht, p\u00ebr arsye t\u00eb ve\u00e7anta mund t\u00eb lejohet q\u00eb ky d\u00ebnim t\u00eb nd\u00ebrpritet p\u00ebrpara se t\u00eb p\u00ebrfundoj\u00eb krejt\u00ebsisht. Sikurse u theksua m\u00eb sip\u00ebr, k\u00ebrkuesi nuk provoi plot\u00ebsimin e afatit q\u00eb t\u00eb mund t\u00eb vler\u00ebsohet si e till\u00eb dhe k\u00ebsisoj k\u00ebrkesa do t\u00eb konsiderohet si e pamb\u00ebshtetur n\u00eb ligj e n\u00eb prova dhe si e papranueshme.<\/span><\/p>\n K\u00ebrkuesi \u00ebsht\u00eb p\u00ebrs\u00ebrit\u00ebs p\u00ebr krime t\u00eb kryera me dashje, sepse me vendimin nr.29 dt 15.04.2013 Gjykata e Apelit p\u00ebr Krime t\u00eb R\u00ebnda, e cila ka deklaruar fajtor p\u00ebr vepr\u00ebn penale \u201cGrup i strukturuar kriminal \u201cparashikuar nga neni 333\/a\/1 i Kodit Penal dhe trafikimi i narkotik\u00ebve n\u00eb kuad\u00ebr t\u00eb grup i strukturuar kriminal parashikuar nga neni 283\/a\/2 dhe 334\/1 i Kodit Penal duke e d\u00ebnuar me 16 vite burgim gjat\u00eb koh\u00ebs q\u00eb ishte i d\u00ebnuar p\u00ebr veprat e kryera n\u00eb vitin 2005. K\u00ebto kushte nuk lejojn\u00eb vler\u00ebsimin e arsyeve t\u00eb ve\u00e7anta apo sjelljes sh\u00ebmbullore. Jane kushte sine qua non pa t\u00eb cilat k\u00ebrkesa duhet t\u00eb rr\u00ebzohej.<\/span><\/p>\n Indentifikimi i \u201carsyeve t\u00eb ve\u00e7anta\u201d si nj\u00eb nga kushtet thelb\u00ebsore p\u00ebr aplikimin e lirimit me kusht vler\u00ebsojme se:<\/span> N\u00eb mas\u00ebn e d\u00ebnimit t\u00eb vuajtur nuk llogaritet koha e p\u00ebrfituar me amnisti ose falje.<\/span> N\u00eb interpretim t\u00eb dispozitave t\u00eb sip\u00ebrcituara dhe duke patur n\u00eb v\u00ebmendje Vendimin Unifikues t\u00eb Kolegjeve t\u00eb Bashkuara t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Lart\u00eb ndaj nj\u00eb t\u00eb d\u00ebnuari mund t\u00eb aplikohet si d\u00ebnim alternativ lirimi me kusht n\u00ebse plot\u00ebsohen k\u00ebto kushte:<\/span><\/p>\n S\u00eb pari, ekzistenca e arsyeve t\u00eb ve\u00e7anta apo sjelljes sh\u00ebmbullore. N\u00eb nenin 64 po dhe n\u00eb interpretim q\u00ebllimor dhe sistematik t\u00eb nenit 65 t\u00eb kodit penal ( s\u00eb bashku lidhen me t\u00eb nj\u00ebtin institut) nuk jan\u00eb p\u00ebrcaktuar rastet q\u00eb konsiderohen si \u201carsye t\u00eb ve\u00e7anta\u201d por referuar q\u00ebndrimit t\u00eb Kolegjeve t\u00eb Bashkuara t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Lart\u00eb \u201carsyet e ve\u00e7anta\u201d nuk jan\u00eb t\u00eb pavarura, ato jan\u00eb t\u00eb lidhura ngusht\u00eb me q\u00ebllimin e institutit t\u00eb lirimit me kusht i cili ka t\u00eb b\u00ebj\u00eb me riedukimin dhe riintegrimin n\u00eb shoq\u00ebri t\u00eb t\u00eb d\u00ebnuarit. Arsyet e ve\u00e7anta nuk jan\u00eb gj\u00eb tjet\u00ebr ve\u00e7se rrethana konkrete, t\u00eb cilat provojn\u00eb se me d\u00ebnimin e vuajtur \u00ebsht\u00eb arritur q\u00ebllimi p\u00ebr edukimin dhe i d\u00ebnuari \u00ebsht\u00eb i gatsh\u00ebm t\u00eb riintegrohet n\u00eb shoq\u00ebri. Ato jan\u00eb fakte t\u00eb cilat provojn\u00eb se me pjes\u00ebn e d\u00ebnimit t\u00eb vuajtur \u00ebsht\u00eb arritur q\u00ebllimi i d\u00ebnimit penal n\u00eb rastin konkret p\u00ebr edukimin e t\u00eb d\u00ebnuarit dhe ai \u00ebsht\u00eb i gatsh\u00ebm t\u00eb riintegrohet n\u00eb shoq\u00ebri.<\/span><\/p>\n N\u00eb rastin konkret nuk ka fakte q\u00eb q\u00ebllimi i d\u00ebnimit penal \u00ebsht\u00eb realizuar me riedukimin e tij .<\/span> S\u00eb treti: n\u00eb rastin e t\u00eb d\u00ebnuarit me burgim t\u00eb p\u00ebrjetsh\u00ebm ligjv\u00ebn\u00ebsi ka sanksionuar se si rregull lirimi i tyre me kusht nuk lejohet, p\u00ebrjashtimisht lirimi i tyre lejohet n\u00ebse lot\u00ebsohen disa kondita t\u00eb tjera t\u00eb cilat sipas nenit 65 t\u00eb kodit penal jan\u00eb : \u2013 t\u00eb ket\u00eb vuajtur jo m\u00eb pak se 35 vite burgim; \u2013 gjat\u00eb vuajtjes s\u00eb d\u00ebnimit ka mbajtur sjellje shembullore; \u00e7mohet se i \u00ebsht\u00eb arritur q\u00ebllimit t\u00eb d\u00ebnimit p\u00ebr edukimin e tij. N\u00eb \u00e7do rast lirimi i nj\u00eb t\u00eb d\u00ebnuari me burgim t\u00eb p\u00ebrjetsh\u00ebm konsiderohet si i jashtzakonsh\u00ebm. N\u00eb vijim, n\u00ebse i d\u00ebnuari \u00ebsht\u00eb duke vuajtur d\u00ebnimin p\u00ebr ndonj\u00eb nga veprat penale t\u00eb parashikuara n\u00eb nenet 78\/a, 79\/a, 79\/b, 79\/c dhe paragrafi i tret\u00eb i nenit 100 dhe rezulton t\u00eb jet\u00eb d\u00ebnuar me burgim t\u00eb p\u00ebrjetsh\u00ebm, lirimi i tij nuk lejohet pavar\u00ebsisht se ai plot\u00ebson t\u00eb gjitha konditat e tjera ligjore si\u00e7 jan\u00eb koha e vuajtjes s\u00eb d\u00ebnimit, sjellja e tij apo fakti se \u00ebsht\u00eb arritur q\u00ebllimi i edukimit t\u00eb tij.<\/span> Gjat\u00eb k\u00ebtij gjykimi \u00ebsht\u00eb administruar raporti i vler\u00ebsimit nga ana e Sh\u00ebrbimit t\u00eb Prov\u00ebs me nr. 621\/2 dat\u00eb 02.12.2019 sipas t\u00eb cil\u00ebs q\u00ebndrimi i k\u00ebtij institucioni \u00ebsht\u00eb p\u00ebr sa m\u00eb posht\u00eb vijon: \u201cSh\u00ebrbimi i Prov\u00ebs, n\u00eb cil\u00ebsin\u00eb e institucionit misioni i t\u00eb cilit, bazuar n\u00eb ligjin procedurial dhe kriteret e ligjore , \u00ebsht\u00eb n\u00eb mb\u00ebshtetje t\u00eb \u00e7do k\u00ebrkese p\u00ebr aplikim t\u00eb d\u00ebnimeve alternative dhe mbikqyrja, mb\u00ebshtetja, asistimi i t\u00eb d\u00ebnuarve gjat\u00eb procesit t\u00eb rehabilitimit dhe risocializimit. N\u00eb fund t\u00eb realizimit t\u00eb k\u00ebtij q\u00ebllimi, Sh\u00ebrbimi i prov\u00ebs , nqa Gjykata do ta gjykonte t\u00eb arsyeshme pranimin e k\u00ebrkes\u00ebs s\u00eb t\u00eb d\u00ebnuarit Endrit Dokle, \u00ebsht\u00eb dakort dhe do ta mb\u00ebshteste k\u00ebt\u00eb vendim dhe n\u00eb p\u00ebrmbushje t\u00eb detyrave funksionale do ta ndihmonte dhe asistonte t\u00eb d\u00ebnuarin gjat\u00eb procesit t\u00eb rehabilitimit t\u00eb tij, pran\u00eb familjes\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n Sipas avokatit t\u00eb t\u00eb d\u00ebnuarit deklaron se ai vuan nga s\u00ebmundje depresive p\u00ebr t\u00eb cil\u00ebn gjykata duhet t\u00eb kishte caktuar ekspert mjekoligjor mbi k\u00ebt\u00eb fakt. Nisur nga q\u00ebndrimi i mjekut gjykata duhet t\u00eb vler\u00ebsoj\u00eb t\u00eb lejoj\u00eb q\u00eb d\u00ebnimi me burgim t\u00eb ekzekutohet jo n\u00eb nj\u00eb I.E.V.P apo n\u00eb nj\u00eb qend\u00ebr t\u00eb kujdesit dhe sh\u00ebndetit publik n\u00ebse provohej s\u00ebmundja mendore, p\u00ebr t\u00eb cil\u00ebn pa u hetuar ky shkak krijon premisa jo t\u00eb sakta mbi rrezikshm\u00ebrin\u00eb e k\u00ebrkuesit. \u00cbsht\u00eb Gjykata m\u00eb pas n\u00eb kuad\u00ebr t\u00eb \u00e7muarjes s\u00eb prov\u00ebs pa i dh\u00ebn\u00eb asnj\u00eb prov\u00eb vler\u00eb t\u00eb paracaktuar t\u00eb analizoj\u00eb n\u00eb t\u00ebr\u00ebsi dhe t\u00eb vendos\u00eb mbi k\u00ebrkes\u00ebn e pal\u00ebs.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false,"gt_translate_keys":[{"key":"rendered","format":"html"}]},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Prokuroria e Kruj\u00ebs ka ankimuar vendimin e Gjykat\u00ebs p\u00ebr lirimin\u00a0 nga burgu t\u00eb ish-pjes\u00ebtarit t\u00eb band\u00ebs s\u00eb Durr\u00ebsit Endrit Dokle. N\u00eb arsyetimin e saj Prokuroria e Kruj\u00ebs deklaron se ka k\u00ebrkuar p\u00ebrjashtimin e gjyqtares Enkelejda Hoxha. Po k\u00ebshtu thuhet se nuk lejohet lirimi me kusht p\u00ebr t\u00eb d\u00ebnuar p\u00ebrs\u00ebrit\u00ebs dhe p\u00ebr t\u00eb d\u00ebnuarit p\u00ebrjet\u00eb. \u201cK\u00ebrkuesi […]<\/p>\n","protected":false,"gt_translate_keys":[{"key":"rendered","format":"html"}]},"author":32,"featured_media":346801,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[65,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-347036","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-lajme","category-te-fundit"],"gt_translate_keys":[{"key":"link","format":"url"}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.hashtag.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/347036","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.hashtag.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.hashtag.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.hashtag.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/32"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.hashtag.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=347036"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.hashtag.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/347036\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.hashtag.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/346801"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.hashtag.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=347036"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.hashtag.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=347036"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.hashtag.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=347036"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\nProkuroria ka paraqitur k\u00ebrkes\u00eb p\u00ebr p\u00ebrjashtimin e gjyqtares s\u00eb c\u00ebshtjes, me arsyetimin se pasi \u00ebsht\u00eb njohur me fashikullin e gjykimit ka rezultuar se i nj\u00ebjti trup gjykues ka gjykuar kerkesa t\u00eb tjera penale si ndryshimi i llojit t\u00eb siguris\u00eb s\u00eb burgut, njohje paraburgimi, amnistis\u00eb, etj, dhe krijoi bindjen e plot\u00eb se ky trup gjykues ka paragjykuar c\u00ebshtjen. Fakte k\u00ebto q\u00eb tregonin se kjo gjyqtare nuk krijonte besimin e duhur p\u00ebr t\u00eb vazhduar t\u00eb shqyrtonte k\u00ebt\u00eb c\u00ebshtje.<\/span>
\nGjykata ka rr\u00ebzuar k\u00ebrkes\u00ebn p\u00ebr t\u00eb cil\u00ebn nuk jemi njohur me vendimin e arsyetuar, por vlersojm\u00eb se n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb proces nuk u garantua e drejta p\u00ebr nj\u00eb proces t\u00eb rregullt ligjor dhe t\u00eb paansh\u00ebm n\u00eb p\u00ebrputhje me nenin 42\/2 t\u00eb Kushtetut\u00ebs dhe nenin 6 t\u00eb KEDNJ-s\u00eb. Sjellim n\u00eb v\u00ebm\u00ebndje t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs, se Gjykata Kushtetuese n\u00eb praktik\u00eb t\u00eb vazhdueshme, ka theksuar r\u00ebnd\u00ebsin\u00eb e gjykimit nga nj\u00eb gjykat\u00eb e paanshme, me q\u00ebllim respektimin e t\u00eb drejtave t\u00eb pal\u00ebve gjat\u00eb gjith\u00eb procesit.<\/span><\/p>\n
\nN\u00eb kuadrin e parimeve kushtetuese q\u00eb q\u00ebndrojn\u00eb n\u00eb themel t\u00eb nj\u00eb procesi t\u00eb rregullt gjyq\u00ebsor, respektimi i parimit t\u00eb paanshm\u00ebris\u00eb mund\u00ebson krijimin e besimit tek gjyq\u00ebsori me q\u00ebllim q\u00eb drejt\u00ebsia jo vet\u00ebm t\u00eb b\u00ebhet, por dhe t\u00eb shihet q\u00eb po b\u00ebhet. N\u00eb shtetin e s\u00eb drejt\u00ebs, kjo k\u00ebrkes\u00eb merr r\u00ebnd\u00ebsi t\u00eb ve\u00e7ant\u00eb n\u00eb funksion t\u00eb besimit n\u00eb dh\u00ebnien e drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb q\u00eb duhet t\u00eb krijojn\u00eb n\u00eb \u00e7do rast n\u00eb shoq\u00ebrin\u00eb demokratike jo vet\u00ebm pal\u00ebt n\u00eb gjykim, por \u00e7do qytetar i thjesht\u00eb (Shih vendimin nr.16\/2003 t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs Kushtetuese)<\/span><\/p>\n\n
\nN\u00eb kreun VII, nenet 58, 59, 59\/a, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64 dhe 65 t\u00eb Kodit Penal parashikohen \u201cAlternativat e d\u00ebnimit me burgim\u201d. K\u00ebto alternativa jan\u00eb njohur n\u00eb Kodin Penal me miratimin e kodit t\u00eb ri n\u00eb vitin 1995. Rastet q\u00eb parashikojn\u00eb nenet e sip\u00ebrp\u00ebrmendura nuk jan\u00eb llojet t\u00eb reja d\u00ebnimesh. N\u00eb k\u00ebto raste, d\u00ebnimi \u00ebsht\u00eb vet\u00ebm nj\u00eb: burgimi. Nenet 59 \u2013 65 t\u00eb Kodit Penal parashikojn\u00eb format apo m\u00ebnyrat e ve\u00e7anta t\u00eb vuajtjes s\u00eb k\u00ebtij d\u00ebnimi.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
\nN\u00eb nenin 64 t\u00eb kodit penal parashikohet se: \u201cI d\u00ebnuari me burgim mund t\u00eb lirohet me kusht nga vuajtja e d\u00ebnimit vet\u00ebm p\u00ebr arsye t\u00eb ve\u00e7anta, n\u00ebse me sjelljen dhe pun\u00ebn e tij tregon se me d\u00ebnimin e tij i \u00ebsht\u00eb arritur q\u00ebllimit p\u00ebr edukimin e tij si dhe t\u00eb ket\u00eb vuajtur:<\/span>
\n-jo m\u00eb pak se gjysm\u00ebn e d\u00ebnimit t\u00eb dh\u00ebn\u00eb p\u00ebr kundravajtje penale;<\/span>
\n-jo m\u00eb pak se dy t\u00eb tretat e d\u00ebnimit t\u00eb dh\u00ebn\u00eb p\u00ebr krime me masa d\u00ebnimi gjer n\u00eb pes\u00eb vjet burgim;<\/span>
\n-jo m\u00eb pak se tre t\u00eb kat\u00ebrtat e d\u00ebnimit t\u00eb dh\u00ebn\u00eb p\u00ebr krime me masa d\u00ebnimi mbi pes\u00eb vjet deri n\u00eb maksimumin e parashikuar nga ligji, me p\u00ebrjashtim t\u00eb parashikimeve n\u00eb paragrafin 3 t\u00eb k\u00ebtij neni.<\/span><\/p>\n
\nNuk lejohet lirimi me kusht p\u00ebr t\u00eb d\u00ebnuarin p\u00ebrs\u00ebrit\u00ebs p\u00ebr krime t\u00eb kryera me dashje; si dhe p\u00ebr t\u00eb d\u00ebnuarit p\u00ebr kryerjen e veprave penale t\u00eb parashikuara nga nenet 78\/a, 79\/a, 79\/b, 79\/c apo paragrafi i tret\u00eb i nenit 100.<\/span>
\nLirimi me kusht revokohet nga gjykata, kur i d\u00ebnuari p\u00ebr nj\u00eb vep\u00ebr penale t\u00eb kryer me dashje, gjat\u00eb koh\u00ebs s\u00eb kushtit, kryen nj\u00eb vep\u00ebr tjet\u00ebr penale me dashje duke u zbatuar dispozitat p\u00ebr bashkimin e d\u00ebnimeve.<\/span>
\nGjykata e urdh\u00ebron t\u00eb d\u00ebnuarin t\u00eb mbaj\u00eb kontakte me Sh\u00ebrbimin e Prov\u00ebs gjat\u00eb periudh\u00ebs s\u00eb prov\u00ebs dhe t\u00eb p\u00ebrmbush\u00eb nj\u00eb ose disa nga detyrimet e parashikuara n\u00eb nenin 60 t\u00eb k\u00ebtij Kodi. Kur i d\u00ebnuari nuk mban kontakte me Sh\u00ebrbimin e Prov\u00ebs ose kur nuk i p\u00ebrmbush detyrimet e parashikuara n\u00eb nenin 60 t\u00eb k\u00ebtij Kodi, t\u00eb urdh\u00ebruara nga gjykata, kjo e fundit vendos z\u00ebvend\u00ebsimin e d\u00ebnimit t\u00eb par\u00eb me nj\u00eb d\u00ebnim tjet\u00ebr, zgjatjen e afatit t\u00eb mbik\u00ebqyrjes gjat\u00eb periudh\u00ebs s\u00eb prov\u00ebs ose revokimin e vendimin p\u00ebr lirimin me kusht.\u201d<\/span>
\nN\u00eb nenin 65 t\u00eb kodit penal, ndryshuar paragrafi I, II me ligjin nr. 10 023, dat\u00eb 27.11.2008; ndryshuar me ligjin nr. 36\/2017, dat\u00eb 30.3.2017, sanksionohet se:<\/span>
\n\u201c1. Nuk lejohet lirimi me kusht p\u00ebr t\u00eb d\u00ebnuarin me burgim t\u00eb p\u00ebrjetsh\u00ebm.<\/span>
\n2. Vet\u00ebm n\u00eb raste t\u00eb jasht\u00ebzakonshme i d\u00ebnuari me burgim t\u00eb p\u00ebrjetsh\u00ebm mund t\u00eb lirohet me kusht kur: Ka vuajtur jo m\u00eb pak se tridhjet\u00eb e pes\u00eb vjet burgim dhe gjat\u00eb vuajtjes s\u00eb d\u00ebnimit ka mbajtur sjellje shembullore dhe \u00e7mohet se i \u00ebsht\u00eb arritur q\u00ebllimit t\u00eb d\u00ebnimit p\u00ebr edukimin e tij.<\/span>
\n3. Nga ky rregull, p\u00ebrjashtohen t\u00eb d\u00ebnuarit p\u00ebr veprat penale t\u00eb parashikuara n\u00eb nenet 78\/a, 79\/a, 79\/b, 79\/c dhe paragrafi i tret\u00eb i nenit 100.\u201d<\/span>
\nNdryshimet q\u00eb ka p\u00ebsuar kodi penal me ligjin nr. 36 dat\u00eb 30.03.2017 jan\u00eb botuar n\u00eb Fletoren Zyrtare nr. 98 n\u00eb dat\u00ebn 05.05.2017 dhe kan\u00eb hyr\u00eb n\u00eb fuqi 15 dit\u00eb pas botimit.<\/span>
\nN\u00eb referim t\u00eb Vendimit Unifikues t\u00eb Kolegjeve t\u00eb Bashkuara t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Lart\u00eb nr. 2 dat\u00eb 25.05.2015 sipas t\u00eb cilit :<\/span>
\n\u201c\u2026 P\u00ebr sa m\u00eb sip\u00ebr, Kolegjet e Bashkuara arrijn\u00eb n\u00eb p\u00ebrfundimin unifikues se:<\/span>
\nLigjv\u00ebn\u00ebsi duke p\u00ebrdorur shprehjen \u201carsye t\u00eb ve\u00e7anta\u201d ka b\u00ebr\u00eb nj\u00eb vler\u00ebsim t\u00eb p\u00ebrgjithsh\u00ebm, pa i nominuar ato e duke e l\u00ebn\u00eb n\u00eb vler\u00ebsim t\u00eb gjykat\u00ebs sipas rrethanave konkrete q\u00eb i paraqiten. Megjithat\u00eb, k\u00ebto \u201carsye t\u00eb ve\u00e7anta\u201d nuk jan\u00eb t\u00eb pavarura dhe duhet t\u00eb jen\u00eb t\u00eb lidhura ngusht\u00eb me q\u00ebllimin e institutit t\u00eb lirimit para kohe me kusht i cili ka t\u00eb b\u00ebj\u00eb me riedukimin dhe riintegrimin n\u00eb shoq\u00ebri t\u00eb t\u00eb d\u00ebnuarit. Arsyet e ve\u00e7anta nuk jan\u00eb gj\u00eb tjet\u00ebr ve\u00e7se rrethana konkrete, t\u00eb cilat provojn\u00eb se me d\u00ebnimin e vuajtur \u00ebsht\u00eb arritur q\u00ebllimi p\u00ebr edukimin dhe i d\u00ebnuari \u00ebsht\u00eb i gatsh\u00ebm t\u00eb riintegrohet n\u00eb shoq\u00ebri. Ky interpretim i paragrafit t\u00eb par\u00eb t\u00eb nenit 64 t\u00eb Kodit Penal t\u00eb \u00e7on n\u00eb konkluzionin logjik se kemi t\u00eb b\u00ebjm\u00eb me nj\u00eb kusht t\u00eb vet\u00ebm dhe \u201carsyet e ve\u00e7anta\u201d nuk jan\u00eb gj\u00eb tjet\u00ebr ve\u00e7se fakte t\u00eb cilat provojn\u00eb se me pjes\u00ebn e d\u00ebnimit t\u00eb vuajtur \u00ebsht\u00eb arritur q\u00ebllimi i d\u00ebnimit penal n\u00eb rastin konkret p\u00ebr edukimin e t\u00eb d\u00ebnuarit dhe ai \u00ebsht\u00eb i gatsh\u00ebm t\u00eb riintegrohet n\u00eb shoq\u00ebri. \u2026\u201d<\/span>
\nN\u00eb pjes\u00ebn analizuese Kolegjet e Bashkuara t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Lart\u00eb \u00e7\u00ebshtjet q\u00eb gjykatat duhet t\u00eb vler\u00ebsojn\u00eb n\u00eb shqyrtimet e k\u00ebrkesave me objekt lirimin me kusht n\u00eb t\u00ebr\u00ebsi si institut jan\u00eb : 1) Natyra e vepr\u00ebs penale t\u00eb kryer dhe sa m\u0451 e lart\u0451 t\u0451 jet\u00eb rrezikshm\u00ebria shoq\u00ebrore e vepr\u00ebs penale t\u0451 kryer, aq m\u0451 i thell\u00eb duhet t\u0451 jet\u00eb hetimi gjyq\u00ebsor n\u0451 lidhje me riedukimin e t\u0451 d\u00ebnuarit, faktin n\u00ebse ajo \u00ebsnht\u00eb kryer n\u0451 bashk\u00ebpunim, me paramendim, apo me dhun\u00eb etj. 2) Q\u00ebndrimi i personit t\u00eb d\u00ebnuar ndaj vepr\u00ebs penale dhe ndaj viktim\u00ebs apo familjes s\u00eb viktim\u00ebs dhe se pendimi i t\u0451 d\u00ebnuarit duhet t\u0451 rezultoj\u00eb nga t\u0451 dh\u00ebna objektive. 3) Ndonj\u00eb vep\u00ebr e m\u00ebparshme penale, e kryer prej t\u0451 d\u00ebnuarit. 4) Gjendja fizike dhe psikologjike e personit t\u00eb d\u00ebnuar, q\u00eb n\u00ebnkupton se n\u00ebse i d\u00ebnuari ka nj\u00eb gjendje t\u0451 r\u00ebnduar fizike apo mosh\u00eb t\u0451 madhe, kjo rrethan\u00eb do t\u0451 konsiderohet n\u0451 favor t\u0451 t\u0451 d\u00ebnuarit, jo vet\u00ebm p\u00ebr arsye humanitare, por edhe pasi rrezikshm\u00ebria shoq\u00ebrore n\u0451 k\u0451t\u0451 rast do t\u0451 cil\u00ebsohet si m\u0451 e ul\u00ebt. 5) Dinamika e sjelljes s\u00eb t\u0451 d\u00ebnuarit n\u00eb IEVP q\u00eb n\u00ebnkupton zbatimin me korrekt\u00ebsi maksimale t\u00eb rregullores s\u00eb brendshme t\u0451 IEVP-s\u0451, por edhe q\u00eb i d\u00ebnuari t\u0451 tregoj\u0451 konkretisht, se gjat\u00eb periudh\u00ebs s\u0451 vuajtjes s\u0451 d\u00ebnimit, sjellja e tij ka qen\u00eb e till\u00eb sa p\u00ebr t\u0451 \u00e7uar drejt p\u00ebrfundimit se i d\u00ebnuari v\u00ebrtet ka treguar pendim, duke u sjell\u00eb me korrektes\u00eb me bashk\u0451vuajt\u0451sit; autoritetet e IEVP-s\u0451; ka mbajtur (ose tentuar t\u0451 mbaj\u0451) marr\u00ebdh\u00ebnie t\u0451 rregullta me familjaret e tij; ka normalizuar (ose tentuar t\u2019i normalizoj\u0451) marr\u00ebdh\u00ebniet me personin e d\u00ebmtuar\/viktim\u00ebn dhe familjen e tij, si dhe ka z\u00ebvend\u00ebsoje d\u00ebmin e shkaktuar nga vepra penale ose ka ndihmuar aktivisht p\u00ebr t\u00eb zhdukur ose pak\u00ebsuar pasojat e vepr\u00ebs penale; si dhe ka marr\u0451 pjes\u00eb n\u0451 aktivitete pune, trajnuese, kulturore dhe edukative. 6) Raporti i autoriteteve t\u0451 IEVP-s\u0451 n\u0451 t\u0451 cil\u00ebn vuan d\u00ebnimin k\u00ebrkuesi, \u0451sht\u0451 me r\u00ebnd\u00ebsi p\u00ebr gjykat\u00ebn p\u00ebr sa i p\u00ebrket analiz\u00ebs s\u0451 saj n\u0451 lidhje me riedukimin e t\u0451 d\u00ebnuarit. P\u00ebr t\u2019u konsideruar si i riedukuar, i d\u00ebnuari nuk duhet thjesht dhe vet\u00ebm t\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb respektuar rregulloren e IEVP-s\u00eb gjat\u00eb vuajtjes s\u00eb d\u00ebnimit, por t\u00eb jet\u00eb aktivizuar duke marr\u00eb pjes\u00eb n\u00eb aktivitete riedukuese, kulturore, trajnuese, pun\u00ebsimi, p\u00ebrmes t\u00eb cilave t\u00eb kuptohet pendimi i t\u00eb d\u00ebnuarit n\u00eb raport me vepr\u00ebn e kryer dhe riedukimi i tij. 7) Gjykata ndihmohet nga raporti i Sh\u00ebrbimit t\u0451 Prov\u00ebs q\u00eb duhet t\u00eb p\u0451rmbaj\u0451 (i) kushtet familjare dhe prejardhjen shoq\u00ebrore t\u0451 t\u0451 d\u00ebnuarit, si dhe (ii) planet konkrete, p\u00ebr t\u0451 mund\u00ebsuar riintegrimin e plot\u00eb t\u0451 tij pas lirimit. 8) N\u0451 lidhje me kushtet familjare dhe prejardhjen shoq\u00ebrore t\u0451 t\u0451 d\u00ebnuarit, Kolegjet kan\u00eb theksuar se kushtet e v\u00ebshtira ekonomike apo gjendja e r\u0451nd\u0451 sh\u00ebndet\u00ebsore e familjar\u00ebve t\u0451 t\u0451 d\u00ebnuarit, nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb q\u0451 n\u0451 raste dhe rrethana t\u0451 caktuara mund t\u0451 merren n\u0451 konsiderat\u00eb si element potencial p\u00ebr efekt t\u0451 uljes s\u0451 rrezikut t\u0451 recidivizmit, ato nuk duhet kurrsesi q\u0451 t\u0451 konsiderohen, n\u0451 vetvete, si element n\u0451 disfavor t\u0451 pranimit t\u0451 k\u00ebrkes\u00ebs p\u00ebr lirim me kusht. 9) P\u00ebr sa i p\u00ebrket planeve konkrete t\u0451 t\u0451 d\u00ebnuarit p\u00ebr t\u0451 mund\u00ebsuar riintegrimin e plot\u00eb t\u0451 tij pas lirimit, Kolegjet kan\u00eb theksuar se ato duhet t\u0451 jen\u00eb sa m\u0451 realiste, n\u0451 raport me mund\u00ebsit\u00eb efektive t\u0451 t\u0451 d\u00ebnuarit, dhe duhet t\u0451 sh\u00ebrbejn\u00eb p\u00ebr t\u0451 b\u0451r\u0451 sa m\u0451 t\u0451 leht\u00eb tranzicionin q\u0451 i d\u00ebnuari kalon n\u0451 periudh\u00ebn menj\u00ebher\u00eb pas lirimit.<\/span><\/p>\n
\na) S\u00eb pari k\u00ebrkuesi \u00ebsht\u00eb d\u00ebnuar p\u00ebr vrasje me paramendim dhe krime t\u00eb tjera t\u00eb r\u00ebnda.<\/span>
\nb) S\u00eb dyti, i d\u00ebnuari e ka kryer n\u00eb bashk\u00ebpunim si dhe ka q\u00ebn\u00eb pjes\u00eb e formacione t\u00eb bashk\u00ebpunimit t\u00eb vecant\u00eb si \u201cgrup i strukutuar krimiminal\u201d<\/span>
\nc) S\u00eb treti, lidhur me q\u00ebndrimin q\u00eb ai ka pasur ndaj vepr\u00ebs n\u00eb p\u00ebrfundim t\u00eb gjykimit ka k\u00ebrkuar pafaj\u00ebsi. Pra, nuk e ka pranuar vepr\u00ebn.<\/span>
\nSa m\u00eb sip\u00ebr, duke pasur parasysh rrezikshm\u00ebrin\u00eb e vepr\u00ebs penale t\u00eb cil\u00ebn ka konsumuar i d\u00ebnuari fakti q\u00eb vep\u00ebr t\u00eb r\u00ebnd\u00eb kund\u00ebr jet\u00ebs t\u00eb cil\u00ebn ai \u00ebsht\u00eb d\u00ebnuar, faktin q\u00eb ajo e ka kryer veprat me dashje direkte dhe n\u00eb bashk\u00ebpunim si dhe faktin q\u00eb ka mbajtur q\u00ebndrim mohues p\u00ebr vepr\u00ebn, nuk krijon bindjen e brendshme se k\u00ebrkuesi ja ka arritur q\u00ebllimin e d\u00ebnimi p\u00ebr t\u00eb liruar para kohe.<\/span>
\nS\u00eb dyti, n\u00ebse me sjelljen dhe pun\u00ebn e tij tregon se me d\u00ebnimin i \u00ebsht\u00eb arritur q\u00ebllimit p\u00ebr edukimin e tij. Sjellja e t\u00eb d\u00ebnuarit vler\u00ebsohet p\u00ebr t\u00ebr\u00eb koh\u00ebn e d\u00ebnimit t\u00eb vuajtur dhe Gjykata mban parasysh respektimin e rregullores brenda institucionit, ekzistenc\u00ebn ose jo t\u00eb masave disiplinore, marr\u00ebdh\u00ebniet e krijuara me bashk\u00ebvuajt\u00ebsit e personelin e institucionit, q\u00ebndrimin e t\u00eb d\u00ebnuarit ndaj vepr\u00ebs penale, angazhimin e tij n\u00eb aktivitetet sportive, kulturore, fetare, pjes\u00ebmarrjen n\u00eb k\u00ebshillimet individuale apo n\u00eb grup, ndjekja e kurseve arsimore e profesionale me q\u00ebllim rritjen e nivelit arsimor, profesional e kulturor, marrja e lejeve shp\u00ebrblyese etj. Provat n\u00eb t\u00eb cilat bazohet Gjykata p\u00ebr t\u00eb konkluduar n\u00ebse me sjelljen e q\u00ebndrimin e tij \u00ebsht\u00eb arritur q\u00ebllimi i edukimit jan\u00eb aktet q\u00eb gjenden n\u00eb dosjet e t\u00eb d\u00ebnuarit dhe regjistrat p\u00ebrkat\u00ebs q\u00eb mbahen n\u00eb \u00e7do I.E.V.P n\u00eb respekim t\u00eb VKM-s\u00eb nr.303, dat\u00eb 25.03.2009 \u201cP\u00ebr miratimin e rregullores s\u00eb p\u00ebrgjithshme t\u00eb burgjeve\u201d.<\/span>
\nFakti q\u00eb k\u00ebrkuesi nuk shprehet p\u00ebr p\u00ebnd\u00ebse e b\u00ebn dhe raportet e sh\u00ebrbimit t\u00eb prov\u00ebs dhe IEVP, n\u00eb lidhje elementin e riedukimit t\u00eb t\u00eb d\u00ebnuarit Endrit Dokle, t\u00eb pa plota p\u00ebr t\u00eb vl\u00ebr\u00ebsuar q\u00ebllimin e riedukimit t\u00eb tij. Gjithashtu nuk shpjegohet se ku bazohet ky q\u00ebndrim kur sipas avokatit t\u00eb k\u00ebrkuesit n\u00eb seance deklarohet se ky shtetas vuan nga semundje depresive, si dhe gjat\u00eb intervistave n\u00eb IEVP i d\u00ebnuari nuk pranon p\u00ebrgjegj\u00ebsin\u00eb kryesore p\u00ebr disa vepra p\u00ebr t\u00eb cilat \u00ebsht\u00eb d\u00ebnuar ( lexo faqe 8 t\u00eb Raportit t\u00eb sh\u00ebrbimit t\u00eb Prov\u00ebs ).<\/span>
\nAjo q\u00eb duhet t\u00eb vler\u00ebsohej dhe t\u00eb analizohej nga instiucionet e m\u00ebsip\u00ebrme dhe prej gjykat\u00ebs \u00ebsht\u00eb dhe fakti se k\u00ebrkuesi \u00ebsht\u00eb d\u00ebnuar pra \u00ebsht\u00eb p\u00ebrs\u00ebrit\u00ebs dhe me vendimin nr.29 dt 15.04.2013 Gjykata e Apelit p\u00ebr Krime t\u00eb R\u00ebnda ,e cila ka deklaruar fajtor p\u00ebr vepr\u00ebn penale \u201cGrup i strukturuar kriminal \u201cparashikuar nga neni 333\/a\/1 i Kodit Penal dhe trafikimi i narkotik\u00ebve n\u00eb kuad\u00ebr t\u00eb grup i strukturuar kriminal parashikuar nga neni 283\/a\/2 dhe 334\/1 i Kodit Penal duke e d\u00ebnuar me 16 vite burgim.<\/span><\/p>\n
\nN\u00eb \u00e7\u00ebshtjen objekt gjykimi rezultoi se k\u00ebrkuesi nuk plot\u00ebsonte kushtet e p\u00ebrmendura m\u00eb lart \u00e7ka n\u00ebnkupton se :nuk provohet ekzistenca e arsyeve t\u00eb ve\u00e7anta apo sjelljes sh\u00ebmbullore, nuk ka vuajtur as 25 vite sipas ligjit para ndryshimeve dhe as 35 vite sipas ligjit n\u00eb fuqi nga d\u00ebnimi i dh\u00ebn\u00eb. N\u00eb rastin konkret duhen hequr koh\u00ebn e p\u00ebrfituar me amnisti rreht 5 vite, k\u00ebshtu k\u00ebrkuesi konsiderohet se ka vuajtur p\u00ebr efekt t\u00eb nenit 64 dhe 65 t\u00eb K.Penal rreth 20 vite pra nuk ka plot\u00ebsuar koh\u00ebn e vuajtjes s\u00eb d\u00ebnimit.<\/span><\/p>\n