TIRANA, July 1 /ATA/The chief prosecutor of Special Anti-Corruption and Organized Crime Prosecution Office (SPAK), Klodjan Braho, told the parliamentary special committee on electoral reform on Thursday that the experience of the 2025 parliamentary elections showed that cooperation between SPAK, the General Prosecution Office, and the Central Election Commission was one of the key elements in preventing and investigating electoral crimes.
According to Braho, SPAK’s nationwide task force, working in coordination with dedicated units established within general jurisdiction prosecution offices, produced concrete results and had a preventive effect through its early deployment and close institutional cooperation.
He said the cooperation mechanism should be activated at least four months before an election, rather than only on polling day, and should remain operational until the completion of the vote count.
“The experience of the 2025 elections showed that the early and visible presence of institutions has a deterrent effect. The very fact that SPAK, the General Prosecution Office, the Central Election Commission, and law enforcement agencies were better coordinated, more visible on the ground, and more active in public communication heightened awareness of the criminal liability for actions that undermine the integrity of elections. This preventive effect is important and should be maintained, but it cannot rely solely on the institutions’ presence on election day. For this reason, the cooperation mechanism should be activated earlier—at least four months before the election date—and remain in place until the vote-counting process has been completed,” Klodjan Braho said.
Braho said electoral corruption should not be treated as an isolated offense, arguing that in most cases it is carried out to favour a political party, candidate, or stakeholder. He added that investigations should go beyond the individuals offering or receiving illicit benefits and seek to identify the source of the funding, as well as the organizers, intermediaries, and ultimate beneficiaries of electoral corruption schemes, Braho said.
“This is why, for the upcoming elections, the focus should be more clearly placed on the financial trail. Vote buying and selling, administrative favors, cash payments, logistical support, services, or other benefits should not be viewed in isolation. They should be analysed as part of a chain linking the source of the funds, the method of distribution, intermediaries, the areas where influence is exerted, and the political or electoral beneficiary of the scheme. In this sense, the main finding is that the 2025 model worked, but it should be further consolidated by shifting its focus toward financial tracing and the identification of the real beneficiaries of electoral corruption,” Braho said.
Drawing on the experience of the 2025 elections, Braho put forward three concrete proposals for electoral reform.
“First, consideration could be given to drafting a National Strategy for the Prevention, Identification, and Investigation of Electoral Crime. Experience shows that electoral crime is not solely the responsibility of a single institution and cannot be addressed only through criminal prosecution after a complaint is filed. It requires an integrated approach, where prevention, administrative monitoring, citizen reporting, police verification, criminal investigation, and financial oversight function as parts of the same institutional mechanism,” Braho said.
Braho proposed strengthening electoral reform framework through two main measures: turning inter-institutional cooperation on electoral crime into a permanent, legally regulated mechanism involving SPAK, prosecutors, the Central Election Commission, police, financial intelligence, and other enforcement bodies, with earlier and longer activation periods; and reviewing criminal policy for serious electoral offences to ensure sentencing is proportionate, particularly in cases involving organised or repeated wrongdoing, rather than simply increasing penalties across the board.
He said sentencing should be individualized, distinguishing between vulnerable voters, representatives of political parties, candidates and their campaign teams, campaign financiers, senior officials, and public employees.
In conclusion, Klodjan Braho reiterated that SPAK will continue to pursue a proactive approach to investigating electoral crimes, based on evidence and risk analysis, and will not limit its work to election periods alone.
/m.q/j.p/r.e/sm/
