After the heated debate in the Elbasan court between lawyer Ulian Barjami and prosecutor Gjergj Ceka, the High Inspectorate of Justice has concluded its investigations into the case. The ILD has requested the High Prosecutorial Council to impose an ethical violation measure on the prosecutor.
Lawyer Barjami was detained for several hours after the debate.
Below is the ILD report:
The High Inspector of Justice has completed the verification initiated primarily, of the information made public in the media, where allegations of ethical violations are raised, provided for by article 102, point 2, letter "dh" of law no. 96/2016 "On the status of judges and prosecutors in the Republic of Albania", as amended, by the prosecutor Mr. Gjergj Ceka and by the judge Ms. Megi Strakosha, with the lawyer Mr. Ulian Barjami, during the debate held in the session of 17.10.2025 at the Court of First Instance of General Jurisdiction of Elbasan, for the assignment of the security measure against citizen ML (S.), which ended with the arrest of the lawyer.
The High Inspector of Justice assesses in advance that the facts (actions or inactions of the magistrate), which may constitute a disciplinary violation, according to the requirements of Law No. 96/2016 “On the Status of Judges and Prosecutors in the Republic of Albania”, as amended, are not only those that are presented on the basis of public information, but are those that are analyzed by the High Inspector of Justice, or assessed on the basis of a verification process or disciplinary investigation. On the basis of public information, a set of facts may be presented, which are alleged to have occurred and which constitute a disciplinary violation, but the High Inspector of Justice may make a precise or different characterization of the facts and actions related to the disciplinary violation, without being linked to the definition that may be claimed in this public information.
In the context of the verification of this case, the High Inspector of Justice has administered from the Court of First Instance of General Jurisdiction in Elbasan copies of the minutes of the court session, where 14 persons were present, for whom the legality of the arrest in flagrante delicto would be assessed and a personal security measure would be assigned. The debate between the lawyer and the prosecutor with questions, answers and frequent mutual interventions between them began after the questioning of the person under investigation ML (S.), who was defended by lawyer Ulian Barjami. The debate between the lawyer and the prosecutor, accompanied from time to time by the intervention of the person under investigation MS, focused on “the expressions/words spoken by the person under investigation, citizen MS, towards the police officers at the moment of being caught in flagrante delicto”, which also included life-threatening expressions. The debate (questions, answers, interventions) was also held between the lawyer and the judge of the case, to clarify the context of the use of these expressions/words towards the police by the person under investigation protected by him at the moment of being caught red-handed. The debate contained statements from the lawyer that he would personally deal with the prosecutor and all police officers and the prosecutor's response that the lawyer would be arrested for these statements. It turns out that the judge drew the attention of the lawyer and the prosecutor regarding the ethics in their behavior towards each other and to focus on the facts, emphasizing that they are what convince the court.
In analyzing the actions and inactions of the magistrate in relation to ethical standards and rules of conduct, the High Inspector of Justice assesses that the provisions of Law No. 96/2016 “On the Status of Judges and Prosecutors in the Republic of Albania”, as amended, which provide for disciplinary violations, cannot be interpreted in a limited manner, but must be interpreted and applied in an expanded manner. This is due to the fact that it is not easy to specify the exact content of the actions/inactions (behavior) and there is no exhaustive definition, except for the existence of a number of examples defined in the Standards of Ethics and Rules of Conduct of the Prosecutor.
The High Inspector of Justice assesses that the behavior of magistrates remains very important, as the magistrate must have full confidence, must be aware that his function and role cannot be simply a profession, but is a model of behavior or lifestyle, which carries values, which must not only be transmitted, but also be displayed in public at all times. For this reason, magistrates must behave and act at all times in accordance with ethical and moral values.
From the verification of the case:
It turns out that the prosecutor did not exercise self-restraint and violated the rules of solemnity and ethics in communication. Taking the floor several times in the session without the court's permission, despite being a form of reaction prompted by the lawyer's statements and expressions, was not at the highest level of ethical standards. Ethical standards are not applied only when fulfilling duties and respecting the law like any other person, but also by behaving with integrity, honesty, self-restraint and discretion, both during and outside the exercise of duty. The personality of magistrates as well as strict adherence to ethical standards in and outside of work are of extraordinary importance for the credibility of individuals, participants in judicial processes, the justice system as a whole, and the authority of state institutions in particular.
It is taken into account that the reason for the debate and its focus were the expressions used towards the police by the person under investigation at the moment of being caught red-handed, the fact that the defense attorney, in the debate with the prosecutor, raised direct accusations against him regarding one of the allegedly falsified pieces of evidence (during the debate, one of the lawyer's expressions was described by the judge as a "threat in the courtroom"), as well as the fact that the situation in the country during this period towards justice officials was serious, due to the murder of Judge AK.
It turns out that as a result of the magistrate's communication not at the highest level of ethical standards, there have been no concrete consequences regarding the exercise of the prosecutor's function, as well as his role as a magistrate, and the prosecutor's behavior has had an isolated character and occurred only once, and has not created ground for inappropriate behavior in other similar cases. At the same time, it turns out that the prosecutor has a seniority in office of 5 years, a relatively short period of his experience as a prosecutor magistrate.
Meanwhile, regarding the behavior of Judge Ms. Megi Strakosha, during the conduct of the session on 17.10.2025, the verification of the case assesses that Judge Ms. Megi Strakosha did not violate the rules of solemnity, the rules of conduct in relations with the parties, or the rules of ethics.
Rezulton që gjyqtarja t’u ketë tërhequr vëmendjen si prokurorit ashtu edhe avokatit të palës, rezulton të ketë kërkuar sqarim të situatës si nga avokati edhe nga prokurori, si dhe rezulton të ketë vepruar në përputhje me parashikimet e nenit 341 të K. Pr. Penale, pasi detyrë e saj ka qenë garantimi i respektimit të autoritetit të gjykatës, solemnitetit të gjykimit dhe sigurisë në sallë, si dhe shmangia e çdo fyerjeje, kërcënimi në gjykim dhe kur ajo ka konstatuar veprime që cenojnë solemnitetin e gjykimit, ka paralajmëruar për pasoja, si largimin nga salla të avokatit dhe caktimin e një avokat tjetër kryesisht, nëse avokati do të vijonte me të njëjtin komunikim.
Nga analiza e të dhënave të grumbulluara nga verifikimi, nuk konstatohen paraprakisht elementë juridikë apo faktikë, të cilët i krijojnë Inspektorit të Lartë të Drejtësisë një dyshim të arsyeshëm për fillimin e hetimit disiplinor ndaj magjistratit prokuror z. Gjergj Ceka, me detyrë prokuror në Prokurorinë pranë Gjykatës së Shkallës së Parë të Juridiksionit të Përgjithshëm Elbasan dhe ndaj magjistrates gjyqtare znj. Megi Strakosha me detyrë gjyqtare e Gjykatës së Shkallës së Parë të Juridiksionit të Përgjithshëm Elbasan në kohën e kryerjes së shkeljes së pretenduar. Për këtë shkak, informacioni i bërë publik në media lidhur me pretendimet e ngritura për shkelje etike duhet të arkivohet bazuar në nenin 122/4 të këtij ligji.
Lidhur me shkeljen e rregullave të etikës nga magjistrati z. Gjergj Ceka, rasti do t’i referohet Këshillit të Lartë të Prokurorisë për t’u marrë në konsideratë në vlerësimin etik-profesional për këtë magjistrat, sipas kërkesave të nenit 77 të ligjit nr. 96/2016 “Për statusin e gjyqtarëve dhe prokurorëve në Republikën e Shqipërisë”, të ndryshuar.
