{"id":752214,"date":"2025-07-21T16:40:53","date_gmt":"2025-07-21T14:40:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.hashtag.al\/?p=752214"},"modified":"2025-07-21T16:45:28","modified_gmt":"2025-07-21T14:45:28","slug":"meta-akuzon-mazhorancen-per-kapje-te-institucioneve-te-shkojme-drejt-nje-referendumi-kushtetues","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.hashtag.al\/index.php\/2025\/07\/21\/meta-akuzon-mazhorancen-per-kapje-te-institucioneve-te-shkojme-drejt-nje-referendumi-kushtetues\/","title":{"rendered":"Meta: Gjykat\u00ebsit nuk jan\u00eb t\u00eb paansh\u00ebm, jan\u00eb n\u00ebn p\u00ebrgjimin e punonj\u00ebsve anonim t\u00eb BKH","gt_translate_keys":[{"key":"rendered","format":"text"}]},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/span><\/p>\n

Ish-Presidenti Ilir Meta vler\u00ebson se asnj\u00eb gjykat\u00ebs n\u00eb Shqip\u00ebri nuk mund t\u00eb jet\u00eb i paansh\u00ebm, p\u00ebr shkak se sipas tij jan\u00eb t\u00eb survejuar dhe t\u00eb p\u00ebrgjuar nga punonj\u00ebs anonim\u00eb t\u00eb Byros\u00eb Komb\u00ebtare t\u00eb Hetimit.<\/span><\/p>\n

Meta mb\u00ebshtet deklarat\u00ebn e avokatit t\u00eb Berish\u00ebs n\u00eb seanc\u00ebn e sotme n\u00eb GJKKO q\u00eb tha se gjykat\u00ebsit e Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Posa\u00e7me jan\u00eb n\u00eb presionin e SPAK.<\/span><\/p>\n

Lidhur me k\u00ebt\u00eb q\u00ebndrim, Ilir Meta ka publikuar nj\u00eb pasazh t\u00eb k\u00ebrkes\u00ebs q\u00eb avokati i tij Kujtim Cakrani ka depozituar n\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebn Kushtetuese kund\u00ebr vendimit t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Lart\u00eb q\u00eb e la at\u00eb n\u00eb arrest n\u00eb burg.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Postimi i plot\u00eb n\u00eb Facebook i Ilir Met\u00ebs:<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

T\u00eb dashur qytetar\u00eb,<\/span><\/p>\n

Lidhur me q\u00ebndrimin e sot\u00ebm t\u00eb avokat\u00ebve t\u00eb Prof. Dr. Sali Berisha, t\u00eb cilin e vler\u00ebsoj me interes t\u00eb lart\u00eb publik, pasi asnj\u00eb gjykat\u00ebs nuk mund t\u00eb jet\u00eb i paansh\u00ebm kur \u00ebsht\u00eb n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb t\u00eb p\u00ebrhershme i mbik\u00ebqyryr, i p\u00ebrgjuar dhe i survejuar, nga punonj\u00ebs anonim t\u00eb BKH, si n\u00eb asnj\u00eb vend tjet\u00ebr t\u00eb KE dhe n\u00eb kund\u00ebrshtim edhe me vet rekomandimet e dh\u00ebna nga Komisioni i Venecias, po publikoj sot k\u00ebt\u00eb pjes\u00eb t\u00eb parashtruar dhe arsyetuar nga avokati Kujtim Cakrani p\u00ebr Gjykat\u00ebn Kushtetuese, q\u00eb tregon k\u00ebt\u00eb situat\u00eb absurde, ku ndodhen sot\u00a0gjyqtar\u00ebt<\/a>\u00a0n\u00eb Shqip\u00ebri.<\/span><\/p>\n

Ky sqarim shterues ka t\u00eb b\u00ebj\u00eb me mij\u00ebra shqiptar\u00eb, t\u00eb cil\u00ebt nuk marrin dot drejt\u00ebsi nga gjykatat tona, p\u00ebr shkak se gjykat\u00ebsit jan\u00eb n\u00ebn mbik\u00ebqyrje t\u00eb p\u00ebrhershme.<\/span><\/p>\n

??\u0308 ??????? ????????\u0308 ??\u0308 ???????\u0308? ???????????,<\/span><\/p>\n

Komisioni i Venecias n\u00eb Opinionin e tij nr. 824\/2015 “MBI PROJEKT-NDRYSHIMET E RISHIKUARA KUSHTETUESE P\u00cbR GJYQ\u00cbSORIN”, 15 janar 2016, shprehu dyshime serioze n\u00eb lidhje me k\u00ebt\u00eb sistem t\u00eb mbik\u00ebqyrjes s\u00eb p\u00ebrhershme t\u00eb gjyqtar\u00ebve. Paragrafi 51 i Opinionit thot\u00eb:<\/span><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Formulimi i p\u00ebrdorur n\u00eb pjes\u00ebn e dyt\u00eb t\u00eb fjalis\u00eb s\u00eb dyt\u00eb t\u00eb nenit 135 f. 3, q\u00eb i referohet detyrimit t\u00eb gjyqtar\u00ebve t\u00eb specializuar dhe an\u00ebtar\u00ebve t\u00eb familjes s\u00eb tyre p\u00ebr t’iu n\u00ebnshtruar “rishikimeve periodike t\u00eb llogarive t\u00eb tyre financiare dhe telekomunikacionit”, duket t\u00eb jet\u00eb tep\u00ebr i gjer\u00eb. Nd\u00ebrsa rishikimi i llogarive financiare \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb mjet specifik dhe efektiv p\u00ebr monitorimin e pasurive dhe t\u00eb ardhurave q\u00eb duhet t\u00eb deklarohen nga nj\u00eb gjyqtar, kryerja e nj\u00eb “shqyrtimi t\u00eb telekomunikacionit” t\u00eb nj\u00eb gjyqtari dhe ve\u00e7an\u00ebrisht t\u00eb familjar\u00ebve t\u00eb tij, n\u00eb munges\u00eb t\u00eb garancive t\u00eb duhura, do t\u00eb \u00e7onte n\u00eb nj\u00eb kufizim t\u00eb panevojsh\u00ebm t\u00eb s\u00eb drejt\u00ebs s\u00eb tyre p\u00ebr privat\u00ebsi.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Komisioni i Venecias kupton se madh\u00ebsia e problemit t\u00eb korrupsionit n\u00eb Shqip\u00ebri k\u00ebrkon masa t\u00eb ve\u00e7anta mbik\u00ebqyrjeje n\u00eb lidhje me operacionet financiare t\u00eb mbajt\u00ebsve t\u00eb zyrave gjyq\u00ebsore dhe prokuroriale dhe se k\u00ebta t\u00eb fundit duhet t\u00eb jen\u00eb t\u00eb p\u00ebrgatitur p\u00ebr t’u ekspozuar m\u00eb shum\u00eb ndaj transparenc\u00ebs dhe kontrolleve shtes\u00eb.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Megjithat\u00eb, Kushtetuta nuk duhet t’u jap\u00eb nj\u00eb let\u00ebr t\u00eb bardh\u00eb sh\u00ebrbimeve t\u00eb siguris\u00eb p\u00ebr t\u00eb p\u00ebrgjuar t\u00eb gjitha komunikimet e nj\u00eb gjyqtari\/prokurori t\u00eb specializuar dhe, n\u00eb ve\u00e7anti, t\u00eb familjar\u00ebve t\u00eb tyre. \u00c7do “rishikim i till\u00eb i telekomunikacionit” duhet t\u00eb shoq\u00ebrohet me garanci procedurale adekuate dhe efektive, duke mbrojtur ata persona nga abuzimet dhe t\u00eb p\u00ebrshkruhet qart\u00eb n\u00eb ligj; N\u00eb ve\u00e7anti, duhet t\u00eb ket\u00eb nj\u00eb autorizim gjyq\u00ebsor t\u00eb bazuar n\u00eb nj\u00eb dyshim t\u00eb arsyesh\u00ebm se personi n\u00eb fjal\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb i p\u00ebrfshir\u00eb n\u00eb disa aktivitete t\u00eb paligjshme.<\/span><\/p>\n

    P\u00ebrgjimi i komunikimeve t\u00eb an\u00ebtar\u00ebve t\u00eb familjes pa p\u00eblqimin e tyre paraprak ose n\u00eb munges\u00eb t\u00eb miratimit gjyq\u00ebsor bazuar n\u00eb disa fakte specifike dhe duke krijuar nj\u00eb dyshim t\u00eb arsyesh\u00ebm p\u00ebr nj\u00eb aktivitet kriminal p\u00ebrb\u00ebn qart\u00eb nj\u00eb nd\u00ebrhyrje serioze n\u00eb privat\u00ebsin\u00eb e tyre. Nd\u00ebrsa gjyqtar\u00ebt dhe prokuror\u00ebt e specializuar mund t\u00eb heqin dor\u00eb nga disa nga t\u00eb drejtat e tyre t\u00eb privat\u00ebsis\u00eb, kjo heqje dor\u00eb mund t\u00eb mos mbuloj\u00eb t\u00eb gjith\u00eb t\u00eb af\u00ebrmit e tyre dhe ligji duhet t\u00eb parashikoj\u00eb nj\u00eb mekaniz\u00ebm t\u00eb ve\u00e7ant\u00eb p\u00ebr t\u00eb mbrojtur interesat e privat\u00ebsis\u00eb s\u00eb atyre q\u00eb mund t\u00eb preken aksidentalisht nga masat e mbik\u00ebqyrjes.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Gjykata Kushtetuese<\/a>, n\u00eb pikat 68-73 t\u00eb vendimit 81\/24, e analizon k\u00ebt\u00eb problem vet\u00ebm nga k\u00ebndv\u00ebshtrimi i garancive n\u00eb faz\u00ebn e procedimit eventual disiplinor ndaj gjyqtar\u00ebve.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Kjo qasje nuk pasqyron praktik\u00ebn gjyq\u00ebsore t\u00eb GJEDNJ-s\u00eb se gjyqtar\u00ebt duhet t\u00eb jen\u00eb t\u00eb lir\u00eb nga \u00e7do presion nga deg\u00ebt e tjera t\u00eb qeveris\u00eb, si dhe nga pal\u00ebt<\/span><\/p>\n

    Kjo \u00ebsht\u00eb ve\u00e7an\u00ebrisht e mpreht\u00eb, si n\u00eb rastin konkret, ku \u00ebsht\u00eb prokuroria q\u00eb monitoron \u00e7do moment t\u00eb jet\u00ebs profesionale t\u00eb gjyqtar\u00ebve.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Nuk ka asnj\u00eb garanci n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb sistem q\u00eb SPAK t\u00eb mos monitoroj\u00eb dhe regjistroj\u00eb diskutimet mes gjyqtar\u00ebve dhe ndihm\u00ebsve t\u00eb tyre, q\u00eb mund t\u00eb jen\u00eb edhe me mjete elektronike, si\u00e7 \u00ebsht\u00eb e-mail ose telefon.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Ky sistem mbik\u00ebqyrjeje institucionalizon nj\u00eb presion t\u00eb rregullt nga nj\u00eb deg\u00eb tjet\u00ebr e Qeveris\u00eb, e cila \u00ebsht\u00eb gjithashtu pala tjet\u00ebr n\u00eb procedur\u00ebn p\u00ebrpara gjykatave t\u00eb posa\u00e7me, p\u00ebrpara Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Lart\u00eb dhe p\u00ebrpara Gjykat\u00ebs Kushtetuese.<\/span><\/p>\n

    P\u00ebr m\u00eb tep\u00ebr kjo pal\u00eb q\u00eb mbik\u00ebqyr gjyqtar\u00ebt ka k\u00ebrkuar masat e paraburgimit kund\u00ebr k\u00ebrkuesit, ligjshm\u00ebria dhe proporcionaliteti i t\u00eb cilave po kontrollohen nga gjykatat. N\u00eb k\u00ebto kushte, “dyshimet e aplikantit p\u00ebr pavar\u00ebsin\u00eb dhe paanshm\u00ebrin\u00eb e gjykat\u00ebs q\u00eb trajtoi \u00e7\u00ebshtjen e tij jan\u00eb objektivisht t\u00eb justifikuara”.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Referenca e Gjykat\u00ebs Kushtetuese p\u00ebr garancit\u00eb gjat\u00eb procedurave disiplinore kund\u00ebr gjyqtar\u00ebve t\u00eb gjykatave speciale nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb shqet\u00ebsim i parashtruesit t\u00eb k\u00ebrkes\u00ebs. N\u00eb \u00e7do rast Gjykata Kushtetuese ftohet t\u00eb kujtoj\u00eb se zyrtar\u00ebt policor\u00eb, n\u00eb baz\u00eb t\u00eb atyre t\u00eb dh\u00ebnave q\u00eb mbledhin gjat\u00eb mbik\u00ebqyrjes mund t\u00eb informojn\u00eb Inspektorin e Lart\u00eb t\u00eb Drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb dhe m\u00eb pas t\u00eb nisin procedur\u00ebn disiplinore ose mund t\u00eb informojn\u00eb edhe prokuror\u00ebt e SPAK p\u00ebr fillimin e procedimeve penale (p\u00ebrkat\u00ebsisht nenet 42 \u00a7 9 dhe 51 \u00a7 3 t\u00eb Ligjit 95\/2016).<\/span><\/p>\n

    Prandaj, presioni ndaj gjyqtar\u00ebve t\u00eb gjykatave speciale nga nj\u00eb mbik\u00ebqyrje e vazhdueshme, e cila nuk bazohet n\u00eb asnj\u00eb dyshim dhe nuk miratohet nga gjyqtari dhe mund t\u00eb shkaktoj\u00eb procedime disiplinore ose penale \u00ebsht\u00eb e p\u00ebrhershme pasi rrezikon seriozisht pamjen e pavar\u00ebsis\u00eb dhe paanshm\u00ebris\u00eb s\u00eb tyre.<\/span><\/p>\n

    N\u00eb p\u00ebrgjigje t\u00eb argumentit t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs Kushtetuese, k\u00ebrkuesi pretendon se \u00e7do gjyqtar n\u00ebn nj\u00eb mbik\u00ebqyrje t\u00eb till\u00eb do t\u00eb preferonte t\u00eb ndiqte q\u00ebndrimin e SPAK sesa t\u00eb rrezikonte edhe mund\u00ebsin\u00eb m\u00eb t\u00eb vog\u00ebl t\u00eb procedimit disiplinor apo penal.<\/span><\/p>\n

    N\u00ebse Gjykata Kushtetuese gjen garancit\u00eb kund\u00ebr nj\u00eb mbik\u00ebqyrjeje t\u00eb till\u00eb n\u00eb nivelin e procedimeve disiplinore, a do t\u00eb supozojm\u00eb, me arsyetim t\u00eb kund\u00ebrt\u00ebn, se legjislacioni shqiptar ka dh\u00ebn\u00eb garanci shum\u00eb m\u00eb t\u00eb m\u00ebdha dhe specifike n\u00eb rastet e mbik\u00ebqyrjes s\u00eb avokat\u00ebve dhe individ\u00ebve, sepse n\u00eb rastet e tyre nuk ka garanci n\u00eb rastet e procedimit disiplinor apo penal? Ata gjithashtu do t\u00eb d\u00ebgjohen nga gjyqtar\u00eb t\u00eb pavarur. Prandaj, arsyetimi i gjykat\u00ebs Kushtetuese n\u00eb vendimin 81\/24 nuk q\u00ebndron.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Rasti i k\u00ebrkuesit \u00ebsht\u00eb evidenc\u00eb juridike \u2013 pala tjet\u00ebr n\u00eb procedur\u00eb ka t\u00eb drejt\u00eb t\u00eb v\u00ebzhgoj\u00eb komunikimin e gjyqtar\u00ebve t\u00eb posa\u00e7\u00ebm dhe familjar\u00ebve t\u00eb tyre.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Mund ta b\u00ebj\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb pa ndonj\u00eb kontroll paraprak ose t\u00eb m\u00ebvonsh\u00ebm nga gjyqtari.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Megjith\u00ebse Gjykata Kushtetuese \u00ebsht\u00eb n\u00eb dijeni t\u00eb paralajm\u00ebrimit t\u00eb b\u00ebr\u00eb nga Komisioni i Venecias n\u00eb opinionin e tij t\u00eb lartp\u00ebrmendur, paralajm\u00ebrimi i cituar n\u00eb pik\u00ebn 71 t\u00eb vendimit 81\/24 , hedh posht\u00eb pretendimet e parashtruesit t\u00eb k\u00ebrkes\u00ebs, pa dh\u00ebn\u00eb p\u00ebrgjigje n\u00ebse procesi i mbik\u00ebqyrjes kontrollohet nga gjyqtari apo jo.<\/span><\/p>\n

    P\u00ebrkundrazi, nenet 42, 49 dhe 51 t\u00eb ligjit 95\/2016 nuk parashikojn\u00eb n\u00eb asnj\u00eb moment q\u00eb ky proces mbik\u00ebqyrjeje t\u00eb autorizohet ose kontrollohet nga gjyqtari.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Asnj\u00eb nga t\u00eb ashtuquajturat garanci q\u00eb Gjykata Kushtetuese p\u00ebrmend n\u00eb pik\u00ebn 72 t\u00eb vendimit 81\/24 nuk i p\u00ebrgjigjet kritereve q\u00eb Gjykata e Strasburgut dhe Komisioni i Venecias i konsiderojn\u00eb garanci kund\u00ebr abuzimeve n\u00eb rastet e mbik\u00ebqyrjes.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Kjo \u00ebsht\u00eb ve\u00e7an\u00ebrisht akute kur gjyqtar\u00ebt jan\u00eb subjekt i nd\u00ebrhyrjeve t\u00eb tilla.<\/span><\/p>\n

    N\u00eb praktik\u00ebn e saj gjyq\u00ebsore p\u00ebr masat sekrete t\u00eb mbik\u00ebqyrjes, GJEDNJ ka zhvilluar masat minimale t\u00eb m\u00ebposhtme q\u00eb duhet t\u00eb p\u00ebrcaktohen n\u00eb ligj p\u00ebr t\u00eb shmangur abuzimet me pushtetin:<\/span><\/p>\n

      \n
    1. i) natyr\u00ebn e veprave penale q\u00eb mund t\u00eb shkaktoj\u00eb nj\u00eb urdh\u00ebr p\u00ebrgjimi;<\/span><\/li>\n
    2. ii) nj\u00eb p\u00ebrkufizim t\u00eb kategorive t\u00eb njer\u00ebzve q\u00eb mund t\u00eb p\u00ebrgjohen telefonat e tyre;<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      iii) nj\u00eb kufi n\u00eb koh\u00ebzgjatjen e p\u00ebrgjimit telefonik;<\/span><\/p>\n

        \n
      1. iv) procedur\u00ebn q\u00eb duhet ndjekur p\u00ebr ekzaminimin, p\u00ebrdorimin dhe ruajtjen e t\u00eb dh\u00ebnave t\u00eb marra;<\/span><\/li>\n
      2. v) masat paraprake q\u00eb duhen marr\u00eb gjat\u00eb komunikimit t\u00eb t\u00eb dh\u00ebnave me pal\u00ebt e tjera;<\/span><\/li>\n
      3. vi) dhe rrethanat n\u00eb t\u00eb cilat regjistrimet mund ose duhet t\u00eb fshihen ose shkat\u00ebrrohen;<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        vii) autorizimi i mbik\u00ebqyrjes dhe kontrollit a posteriori .<\/span><\/p>\n

        Sistemi shqiptar i prezantuar me Ligjin 95\/2016 p\u00ebrcakton disa masa mbrojt\u00ebse n\u00eb lidhje me pikat (ii), (iv) dhe (vi). Madje edhe n\u00eb lidhje me pikat (iv) dhe (vi) masat mbrojt\u00ebse nuk jan\u00eb t\u00eb plota.<\/span><\/p>\n

        Por sistemi shqiptar d\u00ebshton n\u00eb raport me t\u00eb gjitha pikat e tjera. P\u00ebr shembull, n\u00eb lidhje me pik\u00ebn (i) m\u00eb sip\u00ebr, oficer\u00ebt e policis\u00eb s\u00eb\u00a0BKH<\/a>-s\u00eb gjithashtu mund t\u00eb raportojn\u00eb sjelljen e pahijshme etike t\u00eb gjyqtar\u00ebve ose prokuror\u00ebve tek Inspektori i Lart\u00eb i Drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb . Kjo do t\u00eb thot\u00eb se shtrirja e mbik\u00ebqyrjes \u00ebsht\u00eb praktikisht e pakufizuar. Kjo \u00ebsht\u00eb shum\u00eb m\u00eb problematike, sesa sistemi n\u00eb Hungari, ku Gjykata gjeti shkelje t\u00eb nenit 8 t\u00eb KEDNJ-s\u00eb .<\/span><\/p>\n

        Sistemi shqiptar i themeluar me Ligjin 95\/2016 nuk i plot\u00ebson kriteret e p\u00ebrcaktuara nga Gjykata n\u00eb lidhje me p\u00ebrgjimet me shumic\u00eb. N\u00eb Big Brother \u00cbatch dhe t\u00eb tjer\u00ebt kund\u00ebr Mbret\u00ebris\u00eb s\u00eb Bashkuar , Gjykata vuri n\u00eb dukje se sistemi britanik:<\/span><\/p>\n

        “nuk p\u00ebrmbante masa mbrojt\u00ebse t\u00eb mjaftueshme “nga fundi n\u00eb fund” p\u00ebr t\u00eb ofruar garanci adekuate dhe efektive kund\u00ebr arbitraritetit dhe rrezikut t\u00eb abuzimit. N\u00eb ve\u00e7anti, ajo ka identifikuar mang\u00ebsit\u00eb themelore t\u00eb m\u00ebposhtme n\u00eb regjim: mungesa e autorizimit t\u00eb pavarur, d\u00ebshtimi p\u00ebr t\u00eb p\u00ebrfshir\u00eb kategorit\u00eb e p\u00ebrzgjedh\u00ebsve n\u00eb aplikimin p\u00ebr nj\u00eb urdh\u00ebr dhe d\u00ebshtimi p\u00ebr t’iu n\u00ebnshtruar p\u00ebrzgjedh\u00ebsve t\u00eb lidhur me nj\u00eb individ n\u00eb autorizim t\u00eb brendsh\u00ebm paraprak (shih paragraf\u00ebt 377-382 m\u00eb lart).<\/span><\/p>\n

        N\u00eb sistemin shqiptar hetuesi i Byros\u00eb Komb\u00ebtare t\u00eb Hetimeve ka ligj\u00ebrisht dhe realisht diskrecion t\u00eb plot\u00eb n\u00eb fillimin dhe kryerjen e mbik\u00ebqyrjes, si\u00e7 parashikohet nga neni 42 i ligjit 95\/2016 .<\/span><\/p>\n

        N\u00eb ve\u00e7anti, nuk ka autorizim nga nj\u00eb gjyqtar p\u00ebr mbik\u00ebqyrjen dhe n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb pik\u00eb sistemi shqiptar d\u00ebshton edhe n\u00eb krahasim me sistemin rus .<\/span><\/p>\n

        Nuk ka as nj\u00eb kontroll t\u00eb m\u00ebvonsh\u00ebm nga ndonj\u00eb gjykat\u00ebs se si jan\u00eb mbledhur, ruajtur dhe p\u00ebrdorur k\u00ebto t\u00eb dh\u00ebna. Mbik\u00ebqyrja e parashikuar me Ligjin 95\/2016 nuk k\u00ebrkon as autorizimin e prokurorit, gj\u00eb q\u00eb n\u00eb rastin konkret do t\u00eb ishte ve\u00e7an\u00ebrisht problematike, pasi prokuror\u00ebt jan\u00eb pala tjet\u00ebr n\u00eb procedur\u00eb.<\/span><\/p>\n

        Prandaj, mbik\u00ebqyrja mbulon t\u00eb gjitha komunikimet elektronike dhe t\u00eb tjera t\u00eb gjyqtar\u00ebve special\u00eb, p\u00ebrfshir\u00eb familjet e tyre. Mbik\u00ebqyrja \u00ebsht\u00eb e pakufizuar n\u00eb koh\u00eb dhe hap\u00ebsir\u00eb, pa ndonj\u00eb arsye specifike dhe nuk miratohet a priori ose shqyrtohet a posteriori nga asnj\u00eb gjykat\u00eb n\u00eb lidhje me ligjshm\u00ebrin\u00eb ose proporcionalitetin e k\u00ebsaj nd\u00ebrhyrjeje.<\/span><\/p>\n

        Dallimi midis periodikut dhe t\u00eb p\u00ebrhersh\u00ebm q\u00eb Gjykata Kushtetuese p\u00ebrpiqet t\u00eb b\u00ebj\u00eb nuk q\u00ebndron.<\/span><\/p>\n

        Ideja \u00ebsht\u00eb q\u00eb n\u00eb \u00e7do moment gjat\u00eb karrier\u00ebs s\u00eb tyre, me nj\u00eb vendim t\u00eb marr\u00eb nga oficer\u00ebt e policis\u00eb, gjyqtar\u00ebt mund t\u00eb jen\u00eb n\u00ebn mbik\u00ebqyrje.<\/span><\/p>\n

        Mbik\u00ebqyrja vendoset, kryhet, regjistrohet dhe ruhet n\u00eb diskrecion t\u00eb plot\u00eb nga oficer\u00ebt e policis\u00eb q\u00eb jan\u00eb pjes\u00eb e Byros\u00eb Komb\u00ebtare t\u00eb Hetimit dhe p\u00ebrzgjidhen nga ky i fundit p\u00ebr t\u00eb kryer k\u00ebt\u00eb mbik\u00ebqyrje.<\/span><\/p>\n

        Oficer\u00ebt e policis\u00eb mund t\u00eb v\u00ebzhgojn\u00eb komunikimet e gjyqtar\u00ebve sa her\u00eb q\u00eb duan dhe duke ndjekur nj\u00eb periodicitet ata vendosin pa asnj\u00eb kontroll.<\/span><\/p>\n

        Kjo situat\u00eb mjafton p\u00ebr t\u00eb konkluduar se gjyqtar\u00ebt e gjykatave speciale i n\u00ebnshtrohen mbik\u00ebqyrjes q\u00eb nuk paraqet asnj\u00eb garanci, as ligjore dhe as institucionale, dhe nuk mund t\u00eb jet\u00eb e nevojshme n\u00eb nj\u00eb shoq\u00ebri demokratike.<\/span><\/p>\n

        ??????? ???????? ?? ??\u0308 ?????\u0308 ????? ??? ???????\u0308? ? ????????\u0308 ??\u0308 ?????\u0308? ? ??? ?????\u0308? ???????????? ???? ??? ????????\u0308?, ???????, ??\u0308?????????, ???\u0308???? ?????? ??? ??????\u0308??? ? ??\u0308 ????\u0308?? ????\u0308 ?????\u0308????? ??\u0308 ??\u0308 ????????? ?? ?? ? ??\u0308?????????? ??\u0308 ???????\u0308?? ??\u0308 ???????? ??\u0308 ????????\u0308.<\/span><\/p>\n

        ??\u0308 ??\u0308 ?????? ???????? ??\u0308 ?????? ?? ????? ?????? ??\u0308 ?????\u0308????\u0308 ??\u0308 ?????? ?? ?????\u0308?????? ???????, ??????\u0308???? ?? ????\u0308 ?? ???????? ? ???????????? ???????? ?? ??\u0308 ????????? ??? ???????????? ??? ????????\u0308 ??\u0308 ???????.<\/span><\/p>\n

        ??????? ???????? ?\u0308????\u0308 ??\u0308????? \u2013 ???????\u0308? ? ????????\u0308 ?????\u0308????? ????????\u0308?.<\/span><\/p>\n

        Nj\u00eb mbik\u00ebqyrje e till\u00eb e vazhdueshme ngre dyshime serioze p\u00ebr pavar\u00ebsin\u00eb e gjyqtar\u00ebve t\u00eb gjykatave speciale kund\u00ebr korrupsionit dhe krimit t\u00eb organizuar. Nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb e mundur q\u00eb nj\u00eb person i cili, sipas nenit 42 t\u00eb Ligjit Nr. 95\/2016, vihet n\u00ebn nj\u00eb mbik\u00ebqyrje t\u00eb till\u00eb nga nj\u00eb hetues anonim, i cili n\u00eb thelb \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb oficer policie, t\u00eb jet\u00eb autoritet gjyq\u00ebsor q\u00eb plot\u00ebson kushtet e pavar\u00ebsis\u00eb t\u00eb k\u00ebrkuara nga nenet 5 dhe 6 t\u00eb KEDNJ-s\u00eb. Ve\u00e7an\u00ebrisht, hetuesi \u00ebsht\u00eb pjes\u00eb e Byros\u00eb Komb\u00ebtare t\u00eb Hetimit, e cila \u00ebsht\u00eb n\u00eb var\u00ebsi t\u00eb Prokuroris\u00eb s\u00eb Posa\u00e7me, e cila \u00ebsht\u00eb organi q\u00eb ka k\u00ebrkuar masat shtr\u00ebnguese n\u00eb fjal\u00eb dhe q\u00eb i mbron ato para gjykat\u00ebs. Hetuesi q\u00eb anketon gjyqtar\u00ebt e GJKKO dhe GJKKO e Apelit sipas nenit 42 t\u00eb Ligjit Nr. 95\/2016, \u00ebsht\u00eb pjes\u00eb e struktur\u00ebs s\u00eb organit t\u00eb prokuroris\u00eb, gjegj\u00ebsisht pala, veprimet e s\u00eb cil\u00ebs jan\u00eb kontestuar para gjyqtar\u00ebve t\u00eb posa\u00e7\u00ebm dhe jan\u00eb shqyrtuar prej tyre.<\/span><\/p>\n

        P\u00ebr ta p\u00ebrmbledhur, nj\u00eb mbik\u00ebqyrje e pakufizuar, e p\u00ebrhershme , e pakontrolluar, pa asnj\u00eb v\u00ebshtrim dyshimi, ushtrohet ndaj gjyqtar\u00ebve t\u00eb gjykatave speciale, nga Byroja Komb\u00ebtare e Hetimit, e cila \u00ebsht\u00eb pala tjet\u00ebr n\u00eb k\u00ebto procedura.<\/span><\/p>\n

        ??\u0308????, ????????? ??\u0308 ????? ?????????????, ?? ??\u0308? ?????\u0308????? ??\u0308 ?????\u0308 ??? ??\u0308 ?????????? ???? ????????\u0308? ??\u0308 ???????? ??\u0308? ????????\u0308????\u0308 ??? ?????????????????? ? ??\u0308 ?????? ??????, ??\u0308???????\u0308 ???????????? ??\u0308 ??\u0308??\u0308 ????, ??\u0308 ????? ??\u0308 ?????\u0308? ??\u0308 ??????? ??\u0308 ????????????? ??\u0308 ??\u0308?????\u0308?. ???? ????? ???????? ???\u0308 ?????? ??\u0308 ?????\u0308, ?\u0308????\u0308 ? ?????\u0308 ??\u0308 ??????????? ?? ??????? ? ???????????? ??? ??????????? ????? ????????\u0308?? ??\u0308 ????????? ???????? ??? ?????? ??\u0308 ????, ??\u0308 ????\u0308? ????\u0308 ????????\u0308 ?????????\u0308 ??\u0308 ???????? ?????\u0308????? ??\u0308 ???\u0308 ??????? ??\u0308 ??????\u0308, ?????????? ?????????? . ??\u0308?? ????????\u0308 ??? ????\u0308 ??\u0308 ???????? ?? ??????? ??\u0308 ??????????? ??\u0308? ??\u0308 ??\u0308????????? ?\u0327?? ?????? ???????? ??\u0308 ?????? ?? ????????\u0308????\u0308 ??? ??????\u0308????\u0308 ? ???? ?????????.<\/span><\/p>\n

        Si\u00e7 e p\u00ebrmend\u00ebm edhe m\u00eb lart, regjimi i mbik\u00ebqyrjes s\u00eb gjyqtar\u00ebve t\u00eb gjykatave speciale, nuk respekton garancit\u00eb e parashikuara p\u00ebr p\u00ebrgjimin e komunikimeve nga legjislacioni penal shqiptar. Krahasimi i thjesht\u00eb me dispozitat e Kodit t\u00eb Procedur\u00ebs Penale q\u00eb rregullojn\u00eb p\u00ebrgjimin e komunikimeve t\u00eb individ\u00ebve privat\u00eb , zbulon se n\u00eb rastin e fundit jo vet\u00ebm q\u00eb mbik\u00ebqyrja e bisedave nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb automatike dhe e p\u00ebrhershme , por gjithashtu duhet t\u00eb autorizohet nga gjyqtari dhe ka t\u00eb drejt\u00eb apelimi . K\u00ebto garanci nuk ofrohen p\u00ebr gjyqtar\u00ebt e gjykat\u00ebs speciale shqiptare.<\/span><\/p>\n

        GJEDNJ s\u00eb fundmi ka konfirmuar n\u00eb vendimin Pietrzak dhe Bycha\u00ebska-Siniarska dhe t\u00eb tjer\u00eb kund\u00ebr Polonis\u00eb , r\u00ebnd\u00ebsin\u00eb e ve\u00e7ant\u00eb q\u00eb i jepet mbrojtjes nga mbik\u00ebqyrja arbitrare e aktor\u00ebve n\u00eb sistemin e drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb. N\u00ebse ajo \u00e7\u00ebshtje merrej me mbik\u00ebqyrjen e avokat\u00ebve, \u00e7\u00ebshtja merr shum\u00eb m\u00eb tep\u00ebr r\u00ebnd\u00ebsi, p\u00ebr q\u00ebllimin e nj\u00eb gjykimi t\u00eb drejt\u00eb, n\u00eb rastet e mbik\u00ebqyrjes s\u00eb gjyqtar\u00ebve. Kjo \u00ebsht\u00eb ve\u00e7an\u00ebrisht akute n\u00ebse autoriteti q\u00eb kryen procesin e mbik\u00ebqyrjes dhe ruajtjes \u00ebsht\u00eb pal\u00eb n\u00eb procedur\u00ebn penale para gjyqtar\u00ebve q\u00eb jan\u00eb n\u00ebn mbik\u00ebqyrje.<\/span><\/p>\n

        \u00cbsht\u00eb e leht\u00eb t\u00eb theksohet se neni 52 i KPP-s\u00eb shqiptare ofron m\u00eb shum\u00eb garanci n\u00eb rastet e k\u00ebrkimeve dhe p\u00ebrgjimit t\u00eb komunikimeve t\u00eb avokat\u00ebve mbrojt\u00ebs sesa ato q\u00eb Kushtetuta dhe Ligji 95\/2016 parashikojn\u00eb p\u00ebr gjyqtar\u00ebt e gjykatave speciale .<\/span><\/p>\n

        ?? ??\u0308 ????? ? ??????????????? ??\u0308 ???\u0308 ?????? ??????? ? ?????????? ??? ??????? ? ?????? ?? ?????\u0308???? ?\u0308????\u0308 ?????????? ??\u0308??????????, ??\u0308 ????????\u0308 ??????? ????????? ??????\u0308???? ??? ??????????? ??\u0308? ???????\u0308? ??? ????????\u0308? ???????\u0308, ??\u0308? ??\u0308????? ??\u0308 ???????? ??\u0308 ????????, ??? ??\u0308 ??? ??????\u0308 ??????? ??\u0308 ????? ??\u0308? ????????\u0308?!<\/span><\/p>\n

        Ky krahasim \u00ebsht\u00eb i mjaftuesh\u00ebm p\u00ebr t\u00eb arritur n\u00eb p\u00ebrfundimin se dispozitat p\u00ebrkat\u00ebse t\u00eb Ligjit 95\/2016 jan\u00eb nj\u00eb shkelje flagrante e vet\u00eb nocionit t\u00eb pavar\u00ebsis\u00eb dhe paanshm\u00ebris\u00eb s\u00eb gjyqtar\u00ebve t\u00eb GJKKO dhe GJKKO e Apelit. K\u00ebta gjyqtar\u00eb, n\u00ebn mbik\u00ebqyrje apriori dhe t\u00eb pakufizuar dhe pa asnj\u00eb garanci procedurale, nuk mund t\u00eb ofrojn\u00eb garanci pavar\u00ebsie dhe paanshm\u00ebrie p\u00ebr individ\u00ebt q\u00eb paraqiten para tyre.<\/span><\/p>\n

        N\u00eb rrethana t\u00eb tilla, kur gjyqtar\u00ebt q\u00eb vendos\u00ebn masat e paraburgimit kund\u00ebr k\u00ebrkuesit jan\u00eb n\u00ebn mbik\u00ebqyrjen e strukturave n\u00eb var\u00ebsi t\u00eb pal\u00ebs tjet\u00ebr n\u00eb procedur\u00eb, ka arsye legjitime q\u00eb k\u00ebrkuesi Z. Metaj, t\u00eb ket\u00eb bindjen se k\u00ebtyre gjyqtar\u00ebve u mungon pavar\u00ebsia dhe paan\u00ebsia, dhe kjo bindje mund t\u00eb konsiderohet objektivisht e justifikuar (Shih: \u00cbettstein, kund\u00ebr Zvicr\u00ebs, nr. 33958\/96, \u00a7 44, KEDNJ 2000-XI, dhe Ferrantelli dhe Santangelo kund\u00ebr Italis\u00eb, 7 gusht 1996, \u00a7 58, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-III). P\u00ebr k\u00ebto arsye k\u00ebrkuesi pretendon se ka shkelje t\u00eb nenit 5 \u00a7\u00a7 1 dhe 4 n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb rast.<\/span><\/p>\n

         <\/p>\n","protected":false,"gt_translate_keys":[{"key":"rendered","format":"html"}]},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

        Ish-Presidenti Ilir Meta vler\u00ebson se asnj\u00eb gjykat\u00ebs n\u00eb Shqip\u00ebri nuk mund t\u00eb jet\u00eb i paansh\u00ebm, p\u00ebr shkak se sipas tij jan\u00eb t\u00eb survejuar dhe t\u00eb p\u00ebrgjuar nga punonj\u00ebs anonim\u00eb t\u00eb Byros\u00eb Komb\u00ebtare t\u00eb Hetimit. Meta mb\u00ebshtet deklarat\u00ebn e avokatit t\u00eb Berish\u00ebs n\u00eb seanc\u00ebn e sotme n\u00eb GJKKO q\u00eb tha se gjykat\u00ebsit e Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Posa\u00e7me […]<\/p>\n","protected":false,"gt_translate_keys":[{"key":"rendered","format":"html"}]},"author":32,"featured_media":748622,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[65],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-752214","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-lajme"],"gt_translate_keys":[{"key":"link","format":"url"}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.hashtag.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/752214","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=752214"}],"version-history":[{"count":99999,"href":"https:\/\/www.hashtag.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/752214\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":752218,"href":"https:\/\/www.hashtag.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/752214\/revisions\/752218"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.hashtag.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/748622"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.hashtag.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=752214"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.hashtag.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=752214"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.hashtag.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=752214"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}