Among dozens of KPK reports on magistrates removed by resignation from vetting, only a small number of cases have been sent to court. The case of the criminal trial against the former head of the Tirana Prosecutor's Office, Petrit Fusha, shows the obstacles and delays in the confrontation of former magistrates with justice.
The former head of the Tirana Prosecution Office, Petrit Fusha, climbed the steps of the Durrës Court on Thursday, March 26, to be present at the court session of the criminal case against him, but was turned away by the court secretary.
Removed seven years ago by resignation during the vetting process, Fusha has been facing a court case for three years on charges of false declaration and concealment of assets.
According to the court secretary, Thursday's hearing could not take place, as Judge Emirjana Dimo was on leave.
"The parties will be notified of the next session," the secretary said, without giving a date.
The investigation into Fusha began in 2019, after the Independent Qualification Commission requested a criminal investigation into the facts that emerged about his assets during the vetting process. The investigation against him lasted almost 4 years and, after passing from one prosecutor to another, was sent to court with the conclusion that Fusha had declared a complex consisting of a three-story building with a swimming pool, auxiliary facilities and a hotel in Mjull Bathore, a property otherwise known as the “Mai Tai” resort, at a lower value than the real investment.
Fusha is not the only magistrate who resigned from office during the vetting process who is facing criminal proceedings. The Independent Qualification Commission has submitted dozens of referrals to the Special Prosecution Office against magistrates who resigned from the process, but only a small number of them have been sent to court – while the rest have remained on the way.
The criminal investigation of judges and prosecutors based on data obtained from the vetting process has been a key recommendation of the European Union for advancing the fight against corruption and increasing accountability in the judicial system.
Asked by BIRN about the charges brought against him, the former head of the Tirana Prosecution Office, Petrit Fusha, declined to comment, stressing that he would "provide clarifications where necessary, in the courtroom."
"It is in my personal and professional interest that the truth comes to light and justice is served. Procrastinating processes serves no one and I believe that a quick and fair decision-making will put an end to all speculation," Fusha told BIRN.
Dozens of reports, few results
Over the past eight years, the country's 805-strong corps of judges, prosecutors, and paralegals have gone through vetting filters – a key judicial reform process that culminated in the final decisions of the Special Appellate Panel on March 5.
Data analyzed by BIRN shows that 442 re-evaluation subjects or 55% of the total were removed from office; of which 268 were dismissed, 105 resigned and 49 others left without a final decision.
Among the judges and prosecutors who resigned, a significant number were referred to the Prosecutor's Office in accordance with European Union recommendations for handling these cases.
According to EU progress reports, by the end of 2023 the Independent Qualification Commission had referred 34 cases for criminal investigation to the prosecution after administrative verification had revealed criminal elements. In September 2024, the KPK referred another 19 cases for further investigation – leading to almost half of the resigned prosecutors and judges being prosecuted.
Years later, the results of these cases are difficult to find.
The Prosecutor's Office and the Special Court have completed the review of four cases in charge of the former head of the Constitutional Court, Bashkim Dedja, and judges Fatos Lulo, Shkëlzen Selimi and Admir Thanza.
Dedja and Lulo were sentenced to 6 and 9 months respectively for false declaration and concealment of assets, sentences which were suspended. Thanza was also sentenced to 9 months in prison for falsifying the declaration form, while Selimi was found not guilty after a process that lasted several years.
For seven other criminal proceedings on the charge of concealing assets, SPAK requested the termination of the court investigations. The cases relate to the former head of the Supreme Court, Xhezair Zaganjori, and former judges Aleksandër Muskaj, Artan Zeneli, Besnik Imeraj, Edmond Islamaj, Gani Dizdari and Tom Ndreca. The Special Court dismissed SPAK's request as unfounded and ordered further investigative actions. After five years, SPAK has not given any notice on the further fate of these cases.
Other referrals have been distributed to the General Jurisdiction Prosecutor's Offices, where results are also lacking.
Sources at the Tirana Prosecutor's Office confirmed to BIRN that several charges have been filed against the subjects of the reassessment, but as of the publication of this article, they did not provide detailed data. The Durrës Prosecutor's Office continues to have five cases under review.
The Elbasan Prosecution Office told BIRN that criminal charges were filed against three former prosecutors and one former judge during the period January-December 2025 alone. Two of these charges have been sent to the Tirana Prosecution Office for jurisdiction, while a stay of the investigation has been requested in court for the other two.
The rebus of the 'Field' case
Petrit Fusha had a career spanning three decades as a prosecutor and head of the Tirana Prosecution Office before resigning in 2019. Since then, Fusha has practiced law.
The criminal process against him resembles a conundrum that has dragged on for seven years.
Fusha was referred by the KPK to the former Serious Crimes Prosecutor's Office in May 2019 and in the same year, the case was transferred for jurisdiction to the Durrës Prosecutor's Office. In 2020, the Durrës Prosecutor's Office received a second report from SPAK against Fusha by a lawyer, who joined the same proceedings.
Fusha was indicted two years later for the criminal offense of "false declaration and concealment of assets," while the suspicion of money laundering was separated into a separate file.
His case went to trial in December 2023, after changing hands with five prosecutors and with the investigation deadline being postponed seven times. The case is currently being represented in the trial on the merits by the head of the Durrës Prosecutor's Office, Suela Beluli.
The delay in the investigation was followed by nine preliminary hearings held during the period April 2024-February 2025. The reasons for the postponement of the preliminary hearings were mainly related to the change of prosecutors and the time they needed to familiarize themselves with the file.
The trial on the merits of the case against Fusha is being conducted under the usual procedure, as he did not request a summary trial. Since April 2025, ten court hearings have been held, most of which have also been postponed.
The first eight sessions were conducted by Judge Sokol Mara, but after his transfer to the Tirana Court, the case was transferred to Judge Emirjana Dimo. According to court sources, three of these sessions were postponed because Judge Mara was on medical leave, twice the lawyer was absent, and twice more due to a change of prosecutors.
Of these, only two of the sessions have been productive.
In the request for trial, the Prosecution claims that for the "Mai Tai" resort there are discrepancies in the method of creation, initial investment, further investments and income generated by it.
According to the Prosecution, the failure to declare charges Fusha with criminal liability in the form of concealment and false declaration of income and expenses. The prosecution concludes that the defendant has undertaken socially dangerous actions to lose track of the creation of wealth, or by enjoying it through the mediation of close or third parties.
The prosecution also believes that the failure to declare had a well-defined purpose, as the assets derive from illegal benefits obtained through abuse of public office. "Otherwise, there would be no logical and legal sense in hiding assets that come from legitimate and justified sources," the request for judgment states.
According to the data presented in court, Fusha has objected to the investigation of the Durrës Prosecutor's Office as incomplete. According to his legal representative, the evidence and circumstances on which the accusation is based are not clear.
He also objects to an expert report on the value of the resort's investment, brought to trial by the Prosecution. However, in the trial conducted in a preliminary hearing, the court accepted as evidence an expert report conducted by the same expert on behalf of Fusha.
The expert changed her position in the expert report conducted on behalf of the defendant, arguing that she had drafted the document on behalf of the Prosecution without examining the object. In the second expert report, she found a value comparable to that declared by the defendant. /BIRN/
