The "useful idiot" who discovered the unopened envelope and convinced Mero Bazen and Carlo Bollino that they invented the wheel

2026-04-29 15:22:00, Editorial CNA

The "useful idiot" who discovered the unopened envelope and convinced

When you hear Plarent Ndreca speaking so confidently about the “unopened envelope” of digital evidence, the problem is not that he is bringing a different interpretation, the problem is that he is not even showing minimal knowledge of the Criminal Procedure Code. We are not having a legal debate here; we are lacking a basic understanding of the role of the pre-trial judge.

Because, to put it bluntly: that judge is not there to open hard drives, USBs or CDs as if he were an IT technician. He does not conduct a content analysis of the evidence. He verifies their sufficiency through procedural acts, such as the minutes of the examination in the specific case. This is the ABC. It is not an interpretation, it is not a philosophy, it is not a debate, but it is an elementary rule.

When someone who presents themselves as a lawyer presents this as a major problem, “why wasn’t the envelope opened?”, they are essentially showing that they don’t understand how the preliminary phase works at all. It’s like complaining that the referee isn’t scoring goals, without understanding that his role is not to play, but to judge the game.

Who is "giving" to whom, is Ndreca or Erion Veliaj winning?!
April 26, 2:30 PM

And then comes the next part, the easier one: the spectacle. Because when you don't know the procedure, the spectacle becomes very simple. It is enough to take a technical element, dramatize it and sell it as a scandal. The greater the confusion, the stronger the statement seems. In this sense, the lack of knowledge is not an obstacle, it is an advantage for the show.

The irony is even stronger when these “lessons” come from someone who is himself a defendant in SPAK. So we have a situation where a person who should have a vital interest in understanding the rules, comes out and confuses them at a basic level. It’s not just a slip of the tongue, it’s a blatant misunderstanding.

Investigation of tenders for commissariats/ GJKKO passes the file of Plarent Ndreca and 15 other defendants for trial
March 20, 16:27

And of course, this line finds echoes in Mero Baze and Carlo Bollino, who together create an atmosphere as if they have just made an epochal discovery: “The envelope was not opened!”. A great triumph… for anyone who does not know the procedure. For others, it is simply the moment when you realize that you are celebrating something that is actually normal and foreseen by law.

Meanwhile, the reality is simple and without drama: digital evidence is opened and examined in the trial of the merits, when the parties request it and when there is a concrete debate about it. This is how the system works. Anything else is either total procedural ignorance, or an attempt to turn a technical procedure into a spectacle.

In the end, there is not much room for dilemma. When the error is so basic, you are not seeing an alternative interpretation of the rules of the Code, but you are seeing someone who does not know what he is talking about. And when you do not know what he is talking about, the spectacle then comes by itself. Conclusions of the case: Erion Veliaj, for your own good, go back to the lawyers you had. It will minimize the damage that is coming./CNA