TIRANA, July 15 /ATA/ – Chief anti-corruption prosecutor, Klodjan Braho, said on Wednesday that electoral crime remained a serious concern but stressed that the Special Anti-Corruption and Organised Crime Prosecution Structure (SPAK) could only bring charges where sufficient evidence existed.
Braho made the remarks while presenting SPAK’s 2025 annual activity report to parliament’s Committee on Citizen Initiatives, Cooperation and Institutional Oversight, where he fielded questions from opposition lawmakers on electoral crime, investigations involving senior officials and ongoing cases.
“Electoral crime is a matter of concern and it concerns us as prosecutors. It is not something we accept or tolerate,” Braho said. “It is not a phenomenon that emerged over the past year or two, but one that has developed over a long period.”
He said investigations resulted in indictments only when supported by evidence.
“Cases lead to charges only when evidence is found. Without evidence, charges cannot be brought,” he said. “I do not see any double standard in the treatment of representatives of either side. That is a political perception. We do not act on perceptions, but on the evidence contained in the case file. I can assure you that if the necessary evidence exists, anyone, regardless of political affiliation, will be held accountable.”
Asked whether SPAK could seek the lifting of the parliamentary immunity of former Deputy Prime Minister Belinda Balluku, Braho declined to comment on an ongoing case.
“The prosecution has been clear about what it requested, but I cannot assess or reassess parliament’s decision on a specific request,” he said. “As the investigation progresses, the prosecution may take further decisions, but I cannot comment on that matter today.”
Responding to questions about the so-called “Aruba” case, Braho said SPAK does not assign names to investigations and insisted that all evidence is examined in accordance with the law.
“We do not label case files,” he said. “I do not want to comment on a specific investigation, but I can assure you that evidence is never left unattended at SPAK. Claims to the contrary are speculation.”
Braho also dismissed suggestions that political criticism influenced the institution’s work.
“We do not comment on political statements made by any party or individual,” he said. “We have demonstrated in previous cases that everyone is equal before the law in the eyes of SPAK.”
/m.q/ /a.g/u.sh/
