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

 Kliko këtu për të tjera
Voxpress:

Who is Begtash Zeneli, the case after which the Supreme Court requested a review of the "prison arrest"!

2026-04-10 09:41:39Aktualitet SHKRUAR NGA REDAKSIA VOX

Who is Begtash Zeneli, the case after which the Supreme Court requested a review

7.3 kilograms of cannabis hidden in a chicken coop and beehives, seized on the property of citizen Begtash Zeneli from Lezha, could serve as a "precedent" to change judicial practices in granting security measures, especially extreme ones such as "prison arrest".

Although it is not just about this individual, the "Zeneli" case is being seen as a dossier to fundamentally change articles 228 and 230 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which specifically deals with security measures.

"Under these conditions, the concrete issue is not only of interest for the resolution of the individual case, but raises the need to assess whether the practice consolidated by the unifying decision no. 7, dated 14.10.2011, should continue to be maintained in the same sense or requires partial review, as well as whether, in addition to this review, there is a need for unification or further development of judicial practice in the implementation of articles 228-230 of the Code of Criminal Procedure", argues the head of the Supreme Court Sokol Sadushi, in a decision dated 09.03.2026.

Just a month later, the " priority file " was reviewed today by the Joint Panels of the Supreme Court .

session

In the session held today at the High Court, the prosecution was represented by prosecutor Arqile Koça, while judge Ilir Panda, acting as rapporteur, presented the circumstances of the cases offered for review, based on the interim decision of Sadushi.

Lawyer Luan Hasneziri represented the person under investigation, Bektash Zeneli, in this process. Although Zeneli is simply a "case" for "other cases", the debate in today's session took place between the representative of the prosecution and the judges of the Joint Colleges of the Supreme Court.

"The dangerousness of the perpetrator cannot be inferred solely from the dangerousness of the criminal offense," said Koça.

He requested that the United Colleges justify how other, more lenient personal security measures would guarantee the author's participation in the criminal process.

Lawyer Luan Hasneziri pointed out that during his 20-year career as a judge, he had reviewed thousands of requests for personal security measures. According to Hasneziri, the court should also analyze the reasons for the inadequacy of other measures.

"The dangerousness of the criminal offense and that of the person under investigation are insufficient to determine 'prison arrest'. Prison should be imposed when any other personal security measure is inappropriate," he underlined.

dISCUSSION

The suspicion raised by the opposition, but also independent jurisprudence experts, say that the initiative of the head of the Supreme Court to reach a unifying decision of the panels of this court on security measures, aims to release from prison, or lower security measures in the future, for senior public or elected officials, deputies or mayors of municipalities and municipal councils.

Precedents

But in interpreting the reasoning behind why a new unifying decision is necessary, Sadushi mentions three cases of different citizens against Albania, handled by the European Court of Human Rights; the “Muçaj”, “Hysa” and “Gëllçi” cases.

They are taken as a “precedent” that can serve in the final decision of the Supreme Court on the granting of “security measures”. It mentions quotes such as: “the continuation of a reasonable suspicion is a sine qua non condition for the validity of detention in prison, but it is no longer sufficient after a certain amount of time has passed.

In this case, the court must verify whether other reasons given by the judicial authorities continue to justify the deprivation of liberty.

If these reasons are “relevant” and “sufficient”, the court must also ascertain whether the competent national authorities have shown “special care” in the conduct of the proceedings.

This very citation as a "precedent", but also other references, are being discussed as preparation for the Joint Panels of the Supreme Court to now establish another standard for granting security measures, starting not only from the importance of the criminal offense the person is accused of, but also how dangerous they are and after "some time" has passed in the measure of arrest, to see the possibility of changing it.

If the Joint Panels of the Supreme Court decide on substantial changes to Articles 228 and 230 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, issuing a unifying decision, then the "Zeneli case" (a routine criminal prosecution case) could ease the burden on other people currently in prison and others who may be prosecuted in the future, including senior public officials, MPs and local elected officials./ Facto


Në përputhje me standarded JTI

Video

SHIKO KANALIN NE YOUTUBE
×