The recent publication of the draft of the new Criminal Code by the Ministry of Justice has caused debate among legal experts and civil society organizations, due to the proposed increase in severity in the imposition of sentences for criminal offenses and misdemeanors.
The new Criminal Code contains 952 articles. Since the end of July, the draft has been published on the website of the Ministry of Justice and has entered the consultation phase.
In this first phase of consultations, the Professionals of the Alliance of Free Professionals (APL), through a letter sent to the Minister of Justice Ulsi Manja, have requested a careful review of the problematic provisions, emphasizing the need to respect the principle of proportionality and protect economic freedoms and freedom of speech.
Raising concern about the unnecessary expansion of criminal intervention in areas that have traditionally been addressed by civil or administrative law, APL brings to attention several articles that, according to them, may have negative consequences in relationships between businesses.
Article 537, which penalizes “inappropriate service tariffs”, should be reviewed as a matter of priority, since in a market economy, prices are determined by the supply-demand relationship and the nature of the service, not by criminal sanctions. The notion is vague and risks penalizing service providers, unnecessarily interfering in contractual relationships traditionally dealt with by civil or administrative law.
Article 604, which provides that failure to pay, within the legal deadline, self-declared tax obligations constitutes a criminal offense, punishable by a fine or imprisonment of up to one year, but without distinguishing between unintentional delays and intentional evasion;
Article 625 may penalize lawful competition in commercial relations, by penalizing the offer in the presence of a prior agreement.
They also raise concerns that other articles (on defamation, impact on the independence of judges, etc.) risk weakening the oversight role of the media and jeopardizing transparency in a functioning state of law.
The Alliance requests that the process of adopting the Code not be rushed, but be accompanied by broad and comprehensive consultations, including legal professionals, business representatives and civil society.
APL professionals express their willingness to contribute with expertise and concrete proposals, emphasizing that this reform should serve to build a more fair, efficient system in line with European standards.
REPUBLIC OF ALBANIA
MINISTRY OF JUSTICE, PRIME MINISTRY, MEDIA
Addressed to: Minister of Justice
For Information: Office of the Prime Minister, Media
From: Alliance of Free Professionals (APL)
Subject: Proposals and willingness for cooperation on the draft Criminal Code
We are closely following the drafting and public consultation process for the new draft Criminal Code. Our experts are already engaged in analyzing the proposed provisions and we have begun identifying areas where clarifications are needed, harmonization with existing legislation, and approximation with international standards, especially those of the European Union, which we are making efforts to join.
We remain ready to contribute directly to this process, by making our legal expertise and the necessary human resources available, with the aim of assisting in the preparation of a balanced, enforceable and harmonized Criminal Code with Albania's constitutional principles and international obligations.
From the initial review, we highlight several issues that require careful assessment during the discussion phase:
The Draft Code includes provisions that extend beyond the traditional scope of criminal law, penalizing conduct that has so far been addressed through civil or administrative instruments. Such an approach requires careful assessment to maintain the principle of proportionality and to avoid unnecessary overlapping of punitive mechanisms. Some illustrative examples:
Article 537 of the draft amendments to the Criminal Code, which provides for penalties for “inappropriate service tariffs”, should be reviewed as a matter of priority. In a market economy, prices are determined by the supply-demand relationship and the nature of the service, not by criminal sanctions. The very notion of “inappropriate tariff” is legally ambiguous and cannot constitute the subject of criminal law, except in proven cases of fraud or fictitiousness. Its inclusion in the Criminal Code risks unfairly penalizing service providers, unnecessarily interfering in contractual relationships that are traditionally dealt with by civil or administrative law.
Article 604 of the draft provides that failure to pay, within the legal deadline, self-declared tax liabilities constitutes a criminal offense, punishable by a fine or imprisonment of up to one year. This is a significant expansion of criminal intervention in fiscal relations, as such situations have previously been subject to administrative or civil proceedings. The criminal penalization of non-payment, regardless of whether it stems from objective impossibility (e.g., late payments by clients or public institutions) or forgetfulness, does not distinguish between the intention to evade and real market difficulties. Such an approach violates the principle of proportionality and may harm cooperation between taxpayers and the administration.
Neni 625 tërheq vëmendjen për shkak se parashikon ndëshkime penale për ofertat alternative të mallrave apo shërbimeve në marrëdhënie tregtare, kur ekziston një marrëveshje paraprake me një palë të tretë. Kjo do të thotë se penalizohet tentativa për të konkurruar një marrëveshje ende të pafinalizuar, edhe në mungesë të mashtrimit apo fiktivitetit. Një parashikim i tillë kufizon lirinë e konkurrencës dhe sjell ndërhyrje penale në marrëdhënie që natyrshëm i përkasin së drejtës civile dhe tregtare. Formulimet e paqarta si “ofertë e bërë me dijeni të një marrëveshjeje paraprake” krijojnë hapësirë për interpretim subjektiv dhe rrezik penalizimi të padrejtë. Në çdo sistem modern, zgjidhja e këtyre çështjeve duhet të bazohet në nevojë të qartë, qëllim të ligjshëm dhe proporcionalitet të saktë.
Disa parashikime mund të krijojnë kufizime mbi të drejtat dhe liritë themelore, të mbrojtura nga Kushtetuta dhe marrëveshjet ndërkombëtare ku Shqipëria është palë. Është e rëndësishme që këto dispozita të rishikohen në dritën e standardeve të BE-së dhe jurisprudencës ndërkombëtare për të garantuar përputhshmëri të plotë.
Si për shembull, draft‑Kodi i ri parashikon deri në 3 vjet burg për “profanim” të Republikës, duke përfshirë simbolet shtetërore, institucionet ose individët me statusin e “Martirit të Atdheut”. Përkufizimi përfshin shprehje të paqarta si “fyerje”, “tallje” apo “përbuzje” ndaj këtyre subjekteve. Ky nen cenon lirinë e shprehjes, që është një element themelor i çdo demokracie. Për më tepër, përkufizimet e gjerë dhe subjektive rrisin rrezikun e interpretimeve të gabuara dhe të shtrëngimit të hapësirës për kritikë ndaj institucioneve shtetërore.
Organizatat si “Safe Journalists” dhe ato të shoqërisë civile kanë vënë në dukje se ndryshimet e propozuara (përfshirë nenet për shpifjen, ndikimin në pavarësinë e gjykatësve etj.) do të dobësojnë rolin mbikëqyrës të medias dhe do të rrezikojnë transparencën në një shtet ligjor funksional. Kriminalizimi i gazetarëve apo kufizimi i fjalës së lirë përmes Kodit penal jo vetëm krijon frymë frike, por kërcënon edhe funksionin kyç të medias si kontrollues i pushtetit dhe garantues i transparencës.
Duke qenë se Kodi Penal është një nga aktet më themelore të rendit juridik, procesi i konsultimit duhet të jetë i zgjeruar në kohë dhe përmbajtje, duke përfshirë të gjithë aktorët relevantë, organet e drejtësisë, profesionistët e ligjit, biznesin, akademinë dhe shoqërinë civile. Kohëzgjatja aktuale e konsultimit është e kufizuar për një analizë të plotë të të gjitha aspekteve ligjore dhe praktike.
Other issues identified by us raised as concerns by third parties, colleagues and partner organizations. Justice experts criticize the New Criminal Code for unclear wording in some articles, which leave room for arbitrary interpretations by the courts and the prosecution. This risks undermining justice and increasing corruption. Many observers and civil society organizations raise concerns about the increased powers of the prosecution and police in the code, without effective control mechanisms, endangering the freedom and privacy of citizens. Media and experts criticize the inclusion of some minor or medium-sized violations with criminal measures, making the code harsher than necessary and overloading the judicial system.
We see this reform as a valuable opportunity to strengthen the penal framework in our country, making it more effective, fair and in harmony with the principles of the rule of law. We are convinced that, through open cooperation and joint commitment, we can achieve tangible and sustainable results for all citizens.
As the Alliance of Freelance Professionals, we express our willingness to be an active part of this process, offering our expertise, experience and ideas at every stage from discussion to finalization. We believe that constructive dialogue, free exchange of ideas and inter-institutional cooperation are the key to creating a fairer and more functional system./ Monitor
