The Prosecution Office at the First Instance Court of Shkodra has responded to Prime Minister Edi Rama’s statements, in which he criticized Prosecutor Elsa Gjeli for refusing to open a criminal investigation against a businessman.

The State Police had filed a complaint regarding the illegal construction of a tourist complex in Theth, and Rama called on the Ministry of Justice to request Gjeli’s dismissal through the High Prosecutorial Council.

However, according to the Shkodra Prosecution, Prosecutor Gjeli’s decision was fully in accordance with Article 290, point “ç” of the Criminal Procedure Code, which states: “Criminal proceedings cannot be initiated when the act is not foreseen by law as a criminal offense or when it is clear that the act does not exist.”

“Following a thorough assessment of the facts and procedural acts, it was found that the actions reported by the State Police do not constitute illegal construction within the meaning of Article 199/a of the Criminal Code,” the Shkodra Prosecution announced.

In its official statement, the Prosecution emphasized that any attempt to influence a prosecutor’s decision, whether directly or indirectly, violates the principle of separation of powers enshrined in Article 7 of the Albanian Constitution.

“The rule of law cannot function if prosecutors are intimidated for making lawful decisions that may not align with the interests of other branches of power,” the statement reads.

The Prosecution also stressed that any institutional concerns should be addressed through legal channels, not through public political statements that aim to pressure the justice system.

Full Statement of the Shkodra First Instance Prosecution

Following public statements made by the Prime Minister of the Republic of Albania, commenting on the decision of a prosecutor from the First Instance Prosecution of General Jurisdiction in Shkodra, we clarify the following to the public:

The decision dated 30.05.2025 by Prosecutor Elsa Gjeli was taken in full compliance with Article 290, point “ç” of the Criminal Procedure Code, which stipulates: “Criminal proceedings cannot be initiated when the act is not foreseen by law as a criminal offense or when it is clear that the act does not exist.”

In this particular case, a full assessment of the facts and procedural documents concluded that the actions reported by the State Police do not constitute illegal construction under Article 199/a of the Penal Code, because:

The structures identified and reported by the police were temporary containers without foundations, placed on stone slabs, and as such, do not meet the criteria to be considered “buildings” under the standards defined in Law no. 107/2014 “On Territorial Planning and Development”, as amended.

Even the police, in their official on-site inspection report, noted that the containers were not placed on concrete bases but on cut stone slabs.

According to Article 7, point 3, letter “i” of DCM no. 408, dated 13.05.2015, as amended, structures installed for temporary and/or emergency needs, without foundations and made of dismantlable materials, do not require a building permit but only a prior declaration.

Furthermore, the Municipal Construction Inspectorate (IMT) of Shkodra, in its correspondence with the Judicial Police, classified the incident as an administrative offense, not a criminal one. Therefore, the institutions responsible for territorial management should have acted accordingly.

Given the absence of the objective element and criminal consequences, as per legal analysis, initiating criminal proceedings is not possible. As an independent constitutional body, the prosecutor is legally obligated to assess facts in accordance with the law.

In a state governed by the rule of law, the functional independence of the prosecutor is guaranteed by the Constitution and Law no. 97/2016 “On the Organization and Functioning of the Prosecution in the Republic of Albania.” The Prosecution is a constitutionally independent institution that operates in compliance with the law. All procedural decisions are based on facts and evidence, and remain free from any external political influence. Any attempt to interfere with a prosecutor’s decision, directly or indirectly, violates the separation of powers as set forth in Article 7 of the Constitution.

Respecting the separation of powers is fundamental to a functioning democracy. Executive interference in the decision-making processes of judicial institutions, even through public comments, can be perceived as pressure on the justice system and undermines public trust.

The decision not to initiate criminal proceedings is not a matter of personal will, but a legal act grounded in the fundamental principles of substantive and procedural criminal law. Any institutional concern must be addressed through the prescribed legal channels, not through public political messages aimed at influencing the justice system. The rule of law cannot function if prosecutors fear lawful decisions that may not align with the interests of other powers.

The Prosecution remains committed to fulfilling its mission fairly, impartially, and in accordance with the Constitution and the law.