The Constitutional Court has published the reasoned decision approving SPAK's use of wiretapping in the Sky Ecc application, in the cases it is investigating.
The decision was made following a complaint filed by businessman Pëllumb Gjoka, arrested by Operation "Metamorphosis", who alleged the unconstitutionality of SPAK's use of communications on the Sky ECC platform as evidence.
The court examined his claims of violation of fundamental freedoms and rights, including the independence of the courts, the validity of evidence obtained from wiretaps, and respect for the right to defense.
Summary of the decision:
Legality of the interceptions: The applicant alleged that the Sky ECC and EncroChat interceptions were unlawful as they were carried out by the French authorities without informing the Albanian authorities and were used as evidence in the criminal proceedings against him. He argued that the interceptions were massive and undirected, violating his constitutional rights.
Decision of previous courts: Previous courts (First Instance Court of Criminal Procedure, Appeals Court of Criminal Procedure and Supreme Court) had assessed that the evidence obtained from these wiretaps was legal and could be used in the criminal process, as it had been obtained through international legal assistance from the French authorities.
Allegation of infringement of the independence of judges: The applicant argued that the law on special structures of justice (law no. 95/2016) infringes the independence of special judges, as it subjected them to constant supervision by the National Bureau of Investigation (BKH). The Constitutional Court examined whether this interference infringed the independence of the judicial system.
Constitutional Court decision:
The court assessed that evidence obtained from wiretaps through international warrants is not automatically inadmissible, but must be analyzed on a case-by-case basis for its compatibility with constitutional rights.
Regarding the claim of violation of the independence of judges, the Constitutional Court assessed that some provisions of Law No. 95/2016 may be contrary to the Constitution, imposing restrictions on some of the powers of the BKH and the Special Prosecution Office.
Regarding the personal security measure "Arrest in prison" against the applicant, the Constitutional Court upheld the decision of the Supreme Court, assessing that the measures were imposed in accordance with the law.
In conclusion, the Constitutional Court's decision upholds the use of evidence obtained from the Sky ECC and EncroChat wiretaps, but assesses that the supervision of special judges should be reviewed to guarantee their independence. (A2 Televizion)
A2 CNN Livestream
MUND TE LEXONI GJITHASHTU
