Economics expert Hekuran Vladi-Lura has responded by posting on the network about Vetting’s dismissal of Supreme Court President Xhezair Zaganjori.
He writes that only the declaration of untaxed income as a fact of dismissal of the chief judge is sufficient.
“Is the vetting function as an amnesty for the unjustified assets of judges and prosecutors?
How is it possible that the prosecution does not require the seizure of unjustified assets by judges and prosecutors, who risk vetting precisely for unjustified assets? ”He writes.
Posted by Hekuran Vladi-Lura
The President of the Supreme Court declares unearned income for a long period.
First, this fact alone is enough to dismiss the “court” gentleman.
The Supreme Court has reviewed thousands of tax-related rulings, and judges should be penalized for a minor irregularity in the relationship they have with the tax, not for periodic violations of tax evasion.
Secondly, the tax authorities must take absolutely good account of its declaration of untaxed income and must reassess and enforce the fiscal legislation applicable to it, with its liabilities, penalties, interest rates, etc.
Thirdly and most importantly, which is alarming:
Is the vetting function as an amnesty for the unjustified assets of judges and prosecutors?
How is it possible that the prosecution does not require the seizure of unjustified assets by judges and prosecutors who risk vetting precisely for unjustified assets?
There is a principle as old as humanity. The thief is initially deprived of the stolen item, then convicted of the act committed.
