The secret maneuver of Donika Prela and her husband to get off scot-free for tax evasion: the reasons why it is certain that she will be dismissed from the Appellate College.
Other details concerning the Vetting of the head of the Prosecution Office for Serious Crimes, Donika Prela, are revealed. The latter lied to the Independent Qualification Commission, by claiming that she was not aware that her husband had been working “under the table”. With the money she did not pay taxes and with loans which cannot be proved, Prela bought real estate. She managed to get off scot-free from the first-level commission of Vetting, but she risks being dismissed by the Special Appellate College, following the appeal of the Public Commissioner. The College has already set a standard for such cases, by dismissing the subjects who cannot justify their assets, regardless of the decisions taken by the Independent Qualification Commission. It is true that thousands of Albanians have worked “under the table”. But, DonikaPrela, must be dismissed because she is an obstacle to the punishment of crime and government corruption. Because of her, Vangjush Dako, Qazim Sejdini, Damian Gjiknuri, Arben Ahmetaj, Ilir Beqja etc., who have played havoc with Albanians’ money, are free today.
In the appeal of the Public Commissioner it is stated that Donika Prela declared in front of Vetting that she was not aware that her husband had been working “under the table”. But, according to the Commissioner, the evidences show the opposite. “During the administrative investigation on the legality of the source of the accumulation of these assets, the Commissioner found that during 2003-2008, the taxes on social insurance and other tax obligations had not been fully paid and the relationship is not proved in the sense of opportunities that Mr. ***.*** had, regarding the grant of this loan, in his capacity as the other related person. The Commission has come to the conclusion that the subject of re-evaluation has convincingly explained the fact that she was not aware of this practice from her husband’s employerregarding the non-payment of tax obligationsduring almost the entire employment period of 2003-2011. The Public Commissioner estimates that this conclusion is not supported by the administered evidence, made available by the re-evaluation subject herself,” is stated in the appeal.
The Public Commissioner further adds that this circumstance exacerbates the positions of DonikaPrela. “The fact that the subject of the re-evaluation even during the reevaluation process has emphasized that she and her husband were not aware of this tax evasion, in consideration of ethical and professional evaluation is a circumstance that exacerbates the subject’s position on the purpose of the re-evaluation process. We underline that during the period in question, the subject of the re-evaluation held the position ofProsecutor of the Task Force sector, where part of the jurisdiction of their procedural actions / investigation was also the investigation of criminal offenses of the economic scope,” – underlines the Commissioner.
During the verification by the Independent Qualification Commission, Donika Prela’s husband has taken legal steps on the issue of non-payment of taxes. “The Commission during the administrative investigation concluded that citizen ***.*** has taken legal steps regarding the issue of non-payment of taxes, upon being informed of this fact, by filing a lawsuit at the Court of First Instance in Tirana, with subject: “Obligation of the defendant company“***”ltd, to pay in the name of the plaintiff the unpaid obligations in the account of Regional Social Insurance Directorate in Tirana as well as the tax obligations”. This case was still in trial at the time of the Commission’s decision. On February 3, 2019, it results that the Court of First Instance in Tirana at the end of the trial of the case according to the aforementioned object by decision no. *** dated 3.2019 (a decision passed by the denouncer without formal extremities, seals, signatures, etc.), has dismissed the case.”
According to the Public Commissioner, Donika Prela does not justify even ALL 10 million in cash, which she claims to have saved in 2006. “The re-evaluation subject stated for the first time cash savings amounting to ALL 1,000,000, stating:” … we own incomes in ALL (in CASH) coming from salaries, not deposited to banking institutions “. The subject of re-evaluation explains this declaration in her declarations in questionnaire no. *** of the Commission. Based on the administered documentation, it results that the legal income of the re-evaluation subject and her spouse during 2006 amount to ALL 1.006.8144. From the financial analysis it results that the subject does not cover the expenses and declared savings with the legal incomes, resulting in a negative difference of ALL – 285,131.
The Public Commissioner asserts that Donika Prela does not justify even ALL 5 million, which she claims to have saved during 2007. “In this element of the declaration, the possibility of savings amounting to ALL 500,000 was initially analyzed, a sum declared for the period until *** .5.20075. From the administered documentation it turns out that, for this period, the family legal incomes until *** 5.2007, when the first payment was declared, are estimated to be aboutALL408,559, which is not enough to cover the cost of living and the declared savings with which the amount of ALL 500,000 was declared and paid.”/Pamfleti