DREAM / The Prime Minister resigns and wakes up under the Parisian bridge!

 Kliko këtu për të tjera
Voxpress:

'The internal conviction of the prosecutors'/ SPAK's unconvincing reasoning for Ahmetaj's evidence

2022-12-28 18:00:56Fokus SHKRUAR NGA ENDRIT HABILAJ
'The internal conviction of the prosecutors'/ SPAK's unconvincing
Prosecutors Klodian Braho and Ened Nakuçi and Arben Ahmetaj

The decision of the Special Prosecutor's Office not to initiate investigations into the report filed by journalist Adriatik Doçi with accusations of abuse of office and concealment of evidence for the two prosecutors Klodian Braho and Ened Nakuçi, cites a number of articles and laws on which SPAK operates. .

However, no legal and regulatory reference justifies the two prosecutors in the face of their decision not to include in the file of the Elbasan incinerator the invoices that raise reasonable suspicions that Arben Ahmetaj has benefited from Klodian Zoto in at least six cases.

In no citation or legal reference of the document drawn up by the special prosecutor, Alfred Shehu, no answer is given as to why these evidences were not included in the file by the two prosecutors, Klodian Braho and Ened Nakuçi.

To justify their non-inclusion, the decision abandoned the simplified legal logic and entered socio-psychological terms. As an example, in one of the points of the decision, an excessively long and repetitive language is used to show that the special prosecutor is the master of his own file, but without indicating for a moment whether during the investigations the prosecutors Braho and Nakuçi used two standards in evaluating the evidence .

One standard is that the payments found on Klodian Zoto's computer were included in the file, while the second standard, the one that the clues leading to Zoto's payments to Arben Ahmetaj were not taken into account.

Instead of the legal argumentation as to why the documents showing Ahmetaj's benefits from the incinerators were not included, the decision not to initiate the criminal prosecution of the two prosecutors Braho and Nakuçi speaks of the "internal conviction" of the prosecutors in point 4.3.12.

The point elaborates on what internal conviction means, explaining that it 'is the feeling that is formed in the proceeding body, in this case in the two prosecutors Braho and Nakuçi, about the accuracy and sufficiency of the evidence'.

Simply put, the non-inclusion of the evidence implicating Arben Ahmatej with the incinerators is justified by the 'internal conviction of the two prosecutors' and not by the assessment of whether the evidence in question is valuable for the investigation or not.

At the same point, the alibi raised in defense of the two prosecutors is related to the suspicions that these evidences may not be true. Regarding the authenticity, prosecutors Braho and Nakuçi as a rule had to verify the seized electronic devices of Klodian Zoto. Has this verification been done? From the denunciation of the journalist Adriatik Doçi, it is understood that yes, but simply the documents involving Arben Ahmetaj were left out of the file, unlike what was done with the other names in the case.

© Copyright Vox News

This article is exclusive to Vox News, it is copyrighted according to Law No. 35/2016, "On copyright and related rights". The article can be republished by other media only by citing Vox News and placing the source link at the end, otherwise any violator will be held responsible according to Article 178 of Law No. 35/2016.


Në përputhje me standarded JTI

Video

SHIKO KANALIN NE YOUTUBE
×