Lawyer Ledio Braho has called the decision made today by the KLP to raise SPAK with 8 members unconstitutional, while two other members will be in command and will be out of the list of 15 candidates listed by the KLP itself.
In an interview for Faxweb, Braho’s lawyer stressed that the law on SKAK itself is clear when it says that this structure should be made up of 10 members.
Even for the 8 +2 variant Braho emphasized that we are dealing with violations of the law again, as the law of the prosecution clearly states that the commanding prosecutors can join SPAK only if the structure is complete, and if it has started investigating a file, is only when there are concrete files.
‘It is unconstitutional because the number of SPAK members is set out in the Constitution, it is Article’ 148 DH ‘of the Constitution, which stipulates that there must be at least 10 prosecutors for the creation of the SKAK. Today, however, prosecutors who have been part of the KLP rankings themselves, who have been confirmed by a final verdict, are only 8. Today there are two less prosecutors. Whereas the KLP had decided that the creation of the SPAK would take place within November, so in the next 40 days.
If the 8 + 2 misconduct scheme is used, it is likely that the two prosecutors to be determined by command, which is also illegal, will be two prosecutors who were part of the final order made by the KLP itself regarding the candidacies that was a list of 15 prosecutors, and for the two prosecutors this too will be an unlawful list, as the law stipulates when the prosecutors can be commanded in the SPAK.
The only case is when the SPAK is created and in the event of a voluminous file it is possible for the SPAK leader to approach the KLP to appoint another prosecutor outside the SPAK. To get to this point, however, the SPAK should be established, a file investigation should be launched and a concrete file, not a priori command as claimed in this case. So we are dealing with a flagrant violation of the law with regard to the decision we have seen today in the KLP media, ‘said Braho.
The lawyer also noted another violation of the KLP regarding SPAK. According to him, the KLP again violated the law by designating the head of the SPAK until the drafting of the regulation, as the law itself stipulates that the head of the SPAK is elected by the prosecutors themselves who are part of the structure.
‘The other case is that the LAC would also designate the head of the SPAK until the drafting of the regulation by the SPAK itself, which is also illegal, as the law on the prosecution itself states that the head of the SPAK will be elected from among its members. So it is the prosecutors themselves who elect him for a three-year term without the right to be re-elected, ‘said Braho.
