The Special Appeal Chamber held on 27.01.2026, at 09:00, the public hearing of case (JR) no. 51/2023, dated 06.11.2023, pertaining to the appeal of the Public Commissioner against decision no. 701, dated 25.09.2023 of the Independent Qualification Commission, related to the assessee Jurida Bajraktari.
During the submission of the final conclusions, the Head of the Special Prosecution Office Mr. Klodjan Braho stood by his assessment that the shortcomings of the assessee, Ms. Jurida Bajraktari, in terms of her proficiency, are such that they could not be corrected by the training program at the School of Magistrates followed by her, and that the opposite of the appeal could not be proven, even regarding the inaccuracies identified in the declaration of assets. The Head of the Special Prosecution Office held that the Chamber should take into account in the overall evalaution of the case the failure to meet the legal criteria by Ms. Bajraktari in the employment procedure as a legal assistant, as a violation of her professional ethics, a deficiency that cannot be remedied by the training program at the School of Magistrates. The Head of the Special Prosecution Office stated that under Article 61/5 of Law 84/2016, the assessee, Ms. Bajraktari, is considered inappropriate to continue in office, and requested finally the amendment of decision no. 701, dated 25.09.2023 of the Independent Qualification Commission, the dismissal from office of the assessee Jurida Bajraktari.
The legal representative of the assessee provided detailed explanations in the rebuttal of the appeal grounds, maintaining that they are unfair, unsupported in law and evidence. As to the proficiency assessment criterion, the legal representative stated that the only exclusive authority that assesses the correction of the assessee’s deficiencies professionally after attending the training is the School of Magistrates, which has provided a positive evaluation, which should be considered decisive evidence in this proceedings. The legal representative stated that the employment procedure as a legal assistant of the assessee should not have been included as an appeal ground, reiterating also the position that the inaccuracies in the asset declaration are not such as to meet the standards of incorrect declaration. Considering that there is no logical connection in the three assessment criteria for violation of public trust in justice, conduct or concrete evidence, the legal representative finally requested the Appeal Chamber the dismissal of the appeal and the upholding of decision no. 701, dated 25.09.2023 of the Independent Qualification Commission.
After hearing the final conclusions of the parties, the trial panel decided to close the judicial review and withdrew in chambers to make the final decision, which it shall announce on 09.02.2026, at 14:00.
The public hearing shall take place at the premises of the Special Appeal Chamber, at Boulevard “Dëshmorët e Kombit”, no. 3, Tirana.