web counter
LEXO PA REKLAMA!

SHKARKO APP

App Store
Google Play

The Administrative Decision on Veliaj's lawsuit against Prosecutor Dado/ The objection that would set a precedent for justice

2026-07-24 16:18:00, Aktualitet CNA

The Administrative Decision on Veliaj's lawsuit against Prosecutor Dado/

If today the Administrative Court had legitimized Erion Veliaj to oppose the decree appointing prosecutor Ols Dado issued about 20 years ago, a precedent with unpredictable consequences for the entire justice system and public administration would be set.

From that moment on, any defendant would have an interest in suing the decree appointing the prosecutor or judge investigating or trying him, attempting to overturn not his decisions, but his very status. Criminal trials would drag on endlessly, while administrative courts would become an arena where appointments made decades ago would be attacked.

The logic would not stop at prosecutors and judges. Any citizen dissatisfied with an administrative decision could request the annulment of the appointment of the official who signed it, claiming that he was appointed illegally. Instead of reviewing the legality of the administrative act, the courts would be forced to bring the appointments of officials back into question, even after many years.

Such a precedent would undermine the principle of legal certainty and institutional stability. No state act would be final anymore, because every appointment would remain exposed to attacks by anyone who, years or decades later, would be affected by a decision of that official.

Precisely for this reason, Judge Hazbi Balliu, with today's decision, did not defend a prosecutor as an individual. He defended the state, the legal order, and legal certainty.

As for that Association and that Tom Deda, it seems they had come to court with the hope of going down in history. They did… but as the best example of professional and human incompetence. Maybe next time, before they ask to become a party to a lawsuit, it would be good to read their history and then the chapter on active legitimation.

In the end, today's decision did not protect a prosecutor. It protected the state. This is understood by those who see justice as an institution, not those who think that the state operates according to the principle "I don't like the decision, so I'm revoking the appointment of the person who made it."

But a question remains after this process . How did it happen that Erion Veliaj, an association with dismissed prosecutors and convicted lawyers, or individuals dismissed and convicted together, lined up on the same side of the courtroom? What common interest united them in the same cause?

Perhaps this is the greatest irony of this process. A lawsuit that claimed to protect "legality" managed to bring together discredited profiles with pronounced mental problems.

That was probably the other good thing about this trial. Sometimes a trial reveals more than what is said in the courtroom. Just look at who lines up on the same side. /CNA 





Lajmet e fundit nga