
Monika Kryemadhi denies having interfered in Adrian Shatku's companies obtaining a permit for optical fibers. In the GJKKO, the former wife of the Freedom Party leader demands that at least one message be found where she ordered Edmond Haxhinasto for the optical fiber agreement.
Kryemadhi says that everything was done through institutional channels, leaving a trail behind. She also denies that her cousin paid for her daughter's school, which could also be proven by financial analysis.
Monika Kryemadhi: I suggested it not to exert political influence, on the contrary, I say send the request in writing, not electronically. The documents have been sent to several institutions and ministries. Find me a message where I told Haxhinasto "pretend I killed you, pretend I fired you or do it for so much profit". There is no evidence of any interference on the part of Monika Kryemadhi in a procedure that was 6 years old. Even look at the communications between Shatku and Haxhinasto, everything is official, protocol, where nowhere does the businessman say "pretend I spoke to Monika", zero. We have two pages in the indictment and it's wet, it's not wet, you say the submarine with drugs passed. If there had been corrupt interference on my part, the institutional channels would not have been followed. "Hello Mondi, keep it a secret, don't let anyone know", who would have found out, but no, written traces have been left. If there was interference, there was no need to set up a working group. September 24, the communications about my Bora, what connection does my girl have to the accusation, come on, to make it as media-friendly as possible. I tell her "Bora changed her mind", a 16-year-old child in America was far away. These conversations are not related to Haxhinasto, nor to AKEP, nor to illegal influences. I do not think that it is a criminal fact, that every expense made, it is not true that Shatku paid for the girl's school. As they sent the letters, they could have obtained a financial analysis of the girl's expenses from the school.
Kryemadhi said that communication cannot be used for two different issues, while asking for her time because "SPAK has counted the hairs in the house."
Monika Kryemadhi: The relevant communication cannot be treated as universal evidence. A specific communication cannot be relied on in two different issues as evidence, namely the issue of the card, its use, for purchases or private expenses. It is a communication structure with different topics that need to be separated, it is like saying we are here in court, and we are asking for hours what those flamingos are doing on the boulevard. There are almost 70 pages that deal with, let's say, only about optical fibers. If Meta and I had intervened, Haxhinasto would not have done anything, but it did not happen, because 5 working groups have been set up. SPAK has counted the hairs of my house and thrown them in the media, I want my time, you cannot take away my opportunity.
Erion Bani: Ms. Kryemadhi, you have become a lawyer, please be brief. Not every type of communication can be read here, you may have 5,000 emails there, but you can read those messages that are part of the review.