
The Law on "Strategic Investments in Albania" expressly stipulates that the strategic investor must prove 10% of the financial capacity for the realization of the project through the balance sheets of the company that receives the strategic status, credit from local or foreign financial institutions with high reliability, or the guarantee of 10% of the investment from Albanian or foreign financial institutions with high reliability.
The company "EAGLE HILLS REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT" has a capital of 10,000 ALL and does not meet the criterion of having 210 million euros, which corresponds to 10% of the investment value. Likewise, in the business plan, the firm says that it cannot provide more than 160 million euros of investments in the first phase, where 80 million are its own and 80 from the banks. That's why a guarantor comes into play.
Today we have two approved documents: a "Project-Framework Agreement" signed by the negotiating group and approved by the Council of Ministers where the guarantor is "NSHMI DEVELOPMENT LLC" and a Decision of the Strategic Investments Committee that gives this status to the company and recognizes as guarantor the firm "NSHMI DEVELOPMENT LLC".
What activity does "NSHMI DEVELOPMENT LLC" have?
It is a company that deals with construction and the sale and purchase of real estate in Dubai. So it is not a financial institution nor a bank.
Then how can the whole chain of negotiating group with experts and professionals independent of politics recommend the strategic status for this project in violation of the law? Nor has any VKM, or implementing decision, been violated and there is room for interpretation. The law clearly states that the guarantor must either be a bank or a financial institution. Whether it has high reliability or not is open to interpretation.
How is it possible that an entire chain of public administration in the Investment Development Agency recommends granting strategic status to this project? How can the Committee of Strategic Investments made up of important ministers, the State Attorney and headed by the Prime Minister consider the strategic status legal?
On what legal basis did the administration of the Council of Ministers recommend the approval of the "Framework Agreement Project" and how is it possible that none of the ministers at the meeting caught this violation?
If there is a will for investigations, only at this point, the least is "misuse of duty".