Today, on 06.10.2023, at 10:00, the Special Appeal Chamber held the public hearing for the delivery of judgment on case (JR) 9/2021, dated 02.03.2021, corresponding to the appeal of the Public Commissioner lodged against decision no. 318, dated 03.12.2020, of the Independent Qualification Commission, rendered for assessee Kujtim Luli.
Prior to delivering the judgment, the presiding judge, on behalf of the trial panel, has communicated the following:
On 05.10.2023, the High Prosecution Council has forwarded to the Appeal Chamber decision no. 314, rendered on 05.10.2023, through which, has decided to declare the termination of the status of the magistrate because the assessee, Kujtim Luli had reached the retirement age. On the same day, the Appeal Chamber has received the request of the assessee for termination of the re-evaluation process for him, because the assessee no longer enjoys the status of a magistrate.
The trial panel of the Appeal Chamber, on 3 October 2023, has made the decision on the re-evaluation process for the assessee Kujtim Luli, which has been scheduled to be announced and delivered today. Under these conditions, given that the decision of the High Council of Prosecution and the request of the assessee have been filed after the trial panel of the Appeal Chamber had already made the decision, they are absolutely inadmissible, because they were submitted outside of any procedural time limits and after the final decision on the re-evaluation process was made.
In addition to the above, the trial panel finds that the decision of the High Council of Prosecution, no. 314, dated 05.10.2023, although in its paragraph 4, provides that it becomes immediately effective, it contradicts law no. 115/2016, article 192, paragraph 1, which expressly stipulates that, “an appeal can be lodged against the individual administrative act of the Council, within 15 days from the date of notification to the Administrative Court of Appeal, unless otherwise is provided by law.”. In other words, the decision of the High Prosecutor’s Council has not yet become effective.
Even though, this argument is not relevant for not taking into consideration the above acts, the trial panel of the Appeal Chamber deemed it important to communicate it to the public.
Following this communication, the trial panel delivered the judgment made on 3 October 2023, for the case (JR) 9/2021, dated 03.02.2021, corresponding to the assessee Kujtim Luli:
The trial panel of judges of the Special Appeal Chamber, consisting of Natasha Mulaj presiding judge, Sokol Çomo case rapporteur, Albana Shtylla, Ina Rama, Rezarta Schuetz member, delivered the judgment on the case (JR) no. 9/2021, dated 02.03.2021, regarding the appeal of the Public Commissioner lodged against the decision of the Independent Qualification Commission no. 318, dated 03.12.2020, related to the assessee Kujtim Luli.
At the end of the adjudication, pursuant to Article 66, paragraph 1, item “b” of the law no. 84/2016, “On the transitional re-evaluation of judges and prosecutors in the Republic of Albania”, the trial panel, by a majority of votes, ruled on:
1. Amendment of decision no. 318, dated 03.12.2020, of the Independent Qualification Commission and dismissal from office of the assessee Kujtim Luli.
2. This judgment is final and effective immediately.
Delivered today, on 06.10.2023, in Tirana.