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

 Kliko këtu për të tjera
Voxpress:

Ylli Manjani: SPAK's powers must be limited, it was created for the high level of corruption, but today it investigates every file

2023-09-17 10:21:22Aktualitet SHKRUAR NGA REDAKSIA VOX
Ylli Manjani: SPAK's powers must be limited, it was created for the high
Ylli Manjani

"The standard of criminal prosecution that SPAK imposes today is the lowest", insists the former Minister of Justice Ylli Manjani. 

According to an analysis published on social networks, Manjani says that three necessary interventions must be made in the system to improve the quality and standard of the investigation.

Ylli Manjan's post

Again, I think that the problem is with the system.
*****
Beyond the debate about how honest and impartial SPAK prosecutors are, there is room for debate and system change.

I insist on this. The standard of criminal prosecution that SPAK imposes today is the lowest. The question is, is this standard imposed by people or by the system?

There are three necessary interventions that must be made in the system:

1. The jurisdiction and competence of SPAK must be limited. This prosecutor's office was created for high-level corruption and not for any level. It was also created to fight organized crime in the country and not just any crime.
The expansion of jurisdiction and competence leads to overload, resulting in low investigative quality. This debate was ignored throughout the adoption of the reform.

2. The criminal procedure is done like a pasta strainer. The frequent interventions in it have created pitfalls, reversal of logic, chronology and lowering of the standard in criminal prosecution.
A new procedure is needed, well written and with harmonious logic.
The procedure is the guarantee, not the people.

3. The SPAK prosecutor cannot work under the pressure of the mandate.
There cannot be a free, independent and professionally correct prosecutor if he has to perform within a mandate. Mandates have meaning for elected officials and heads of institutions, not for professionals.

The mandate given to a professional is pressure. Due to the pressure, the prosecutor will either work back and forth to do something within the mandate and get another job in the future, or he will hang on until the deadline expires, because a job is guaranteed anyway.
In both cases, investigative quality declines. As it happened...

This lapse falls squarely on the standard of prosecution, which is in the public interest.
Then the crime has no mandate. Why should there be a prosecutor who investigates the crime?!

Imagine, the prosecutor leaves the investigation in the middle because his term ends. What logic is this?!
That's why I say that the SPAK prosecutor must have a term of office. He must serve there for life and is responsible for the quality of investigations.
The head of the prosecution yes, there may be a deadline. The management of the institution changes, the professional work does not.

And finally, I have had and believe this:

there can be no special courts. There are special investigations, there are also special prosecutors, but the court is general, ordinary and normal.
Everyone is equal before the court. But before the special courts, the equality of the parties is "special", that is, it is not at all.


Në përputhje me standarded JTI

Video

SHIKO KANALIN NE YOUTUBE
×