Judge Ervin Pollozhani gives explanations about the resources of the wife's apartment

2023-07-22 17:36:00, Aktualitet CNA

Judge Ervin Pollozhani gives explanations about the resources of the wife's

The judge of Tirana, Ervin Pollozhani

The judge of Tirana, Ervin Pollozhani, gave explanations about the income of the wife's family, about the sale of several cars as well as about the contacts with the brother-in-law convicted in the United Kingdom and asked for confirmation in office.

The judge of Tirana, Ervin Pollozhani, faced the Independent Qualification Commission, KPK, on ??Thursday, July 20, when during the hearing he gave explanations about the financial resources of his wife's family that had been used for the purchase of an apartment by her.

Questioned by the observer of the International Monitoring Operation, Pollozhani also gave explanations about eight cars that he had sold at almost the same price or more expensive than he had bought them, as well as about contacts with his brother-in-law convicted in the United Kingdom.

The re-evaluation process for Judge Pollozhani is being carried out by the KPK body headed by Roland Ilia, with rapporteur Pamela Qirko and member Brunilda Bekteshin. Steven Kessler was present as an international observer.

Ervin Pollozhani completed his studies at the Magistrate's School in 2006 and was appointed to the Court of Elbasan, where he worked during the years 2006-2010. Since 2010, he has been working in the Tirana District Court.

Findings for wealth

In the "veting" statement, the subject has reflected the purchase of an apartment in 2016 against the value of 120 thousand euros, property ordered in 2014. As a source of creation, he has declared the sale of the previous apartment. The commission finds that the wife sold in 2014 for the price of 130 thousand euros an apartment bought in 2012 for 11 million and 700 thousand lek, which she had ordered in 2007 for the amount of 117 thousand euros.

According to the subject's explanations, the wife repaid the amount of 115 thousand euros in 2007 when the order contract was signed and two thousand euros would be paid at the time of delivery.

Judge Pollozhani emphasized that the financial resources that served to pay the price of the apartment in 2007 were created before cohabitation and marriage with his wife.

The subject has detailed as sources the income from the private activity of the wife's father; from her work as a translator during the Kosovo war; as well as from the sale of medicinal plants, which he considered sufficient to cover the price of the apartment ordered in 2007.

The subject has also declared a deposit in the amount of 4.8 million ALL, with the source of income and deposits previously created over the years. Qirko said that it seems that this deposit has its origin in the return of an amount of 4.4 million ALL from the construction company in January 2012, when the final contract for the purchase of the apartment ordered in 2007 was executed.

The value returned by the construction company in 2012 is considered the difference between the price paid in 2007 and the purchase price. Qirko noted that the will to return this amount was expressed by a notarial declaration, and it turned out that there was a change of surface area. According to the reporter, it seems that the amount of 4 million and 446 thousand ALL is part of the funds paid in 2007, before the start of cohabitation between the subject and his wife.

Meanwhile, the administrative investigation has shown that the legality of the income of the wife of Judge Pollozhani's family to cover the investment made by her in 2007 has not been proven. For this reason, the subject has been asked to provide explanations and submit evidence to prove the legality of the income of the wife's family.

A similar situation was found for the creation of a cash balance of 1 million ALL, much of which Qirko said seems to have as a source and a part of the funds returned in 2012. However, from the financial analysis, it was found that the subject and his wife had the opportunity to save this liquidity.

Judge Pollozhani emphasized at the beginning of his speech that with the explanations and evidence he had submitted to the Commission, he had managed to prove the legality of the sources of his and his wife's assets. He underlined that, since the finding of the KPK had to do with property created by the wife before marriage and cohabitation, he would focus his explanation in this direction, both in the legal analysis and the sources.

He claimed that he had no legal obligation to justify assets created by his wife before they lived together. But he added that, based on the fact that it affects assets created during the marital regime, he would provide explanations for the resources in the interest of transparency.

According to Pollozhan, the income of the wife's family for the period 1995-2007 was over 37 million ALL. He listed the activities from which these incomes were generated, such as the family business started in 1994 when he received permission from the Municipality of Tropoja; wife's payments as a translator from international institutions; income from the sale of medicinal plants; as well as from his wife's salary as a doctor.

He requested that a profit margin be calculated for the income from his wife's family business.

Pollozhani also added that he had provided documentation from the state institutions proving that the father-in-law was not a debtor and had paid off all the obligations; that he had bought in 2000 a cargo van for commercial activity and the transportation of medicinal plants. According to the subject, in 2005 the father-in-law had rented another premises because there had been an increase in commercial activity.

Regarding his wife's income from her work as a translator, he clarified that he had filed notarial declarations for the exercise of this activity by her.

In order to prove the income from medicinal plants, he said that he had made available the permits for the transport of goods. According to the subject, it is proven that the income and the possibility of saving exceed the value invested in 2007 for the purchase of the apartment.

Regarding the amount returned in 2012 by the construction company, he insisted that since he had proven the legality of the investment made, he had simultaneously proven the legality of the amount of 4 million and 446 thousand ALL.

He said that he was interested in documenting the return of the amount due to the declaration he made, but that he could not dictate the will between the company and his wife.

Asked by Qirko about the initial investment made by the co-owner, the subject stated that there had been no contribution. Regarding the speaker's question as to why his wife had designated him as a co-owner in the apartment they currently own, when it was purchased with the funds obtained from the sale of the apartment purchased with her family's income, Pollozhani stated that this was his wife's will.

Next, the subject faced questions from the international observer, Steven Kessler, who pointed out that the subject had known his wife since 2005.

Pollozhani admitted that there had been an introduction in 2005, but he emphasized that there had been no relationship and cohabitation. According to the subject, at that time the wife lived and worked in Tropoja, while he in Tirana and Elbasan and that they had not discussed marriage.

Asked by Kessler if the decision to get married was made in 2007 or 2008, Pollozhani stated that he could not say exactly. "We discussed it a while before we got married," he explained, while admitting that his wife had bought and paid for the apartment a few months before the wedding.

Kessler further noted that the wife's parents have two sons and another daughter, and asked the subject if it seemed fair that they had been so generous with this daughter, when they had three other children. "I don't know, their choice", answered Pollozhani.

He explained that in 2010 they had entered to live in the apartment bought by his wife, but because some works had not been completed; that the area had been reduced and there had been delays, it was agreed to compensate about 4.4 million ALL.

Pollozhani denied that this behavior of the construction company was related to his position as a judge. He added that he had always given up on examining the issues in which this construction company had been a party.

Kessler found that Pollozhani had bought and sold about eight vehicles over the years, mostly Benz, at almost the purchase price or more and in one case twice as much.

"How do you manage to be so good at selling them higher," Kessler asked, a finding not previously cited by the Commission.

The subject stated that since 2014 he had no longer had a personal car, but added that they only own one family vehicle. He claimed that he had bought these vehicles at real prices and that they were not luxury cars. Pollozhani objected to the sale of a vehicle for double the purchase price, explaining that he had also paid the customs clearance value.

He explained that he had sold the tools either with signs placed on them, or through information distributed by acquaintances. According to the subject, the prices are agreed upon by the will of the parties.

The commission found an incorrect statement regarding a vehicle purchased for the price of 400 thousand lek, therefore financial impossibility was found. The subject described the inaccuracy as a slip.

Figure and professionalism

Reporter Qirko presented a positive report on the purity of the figure for Judge Pollozhani. While the international observer, Steven Kessler, asked the subject what contacts he had with his wife's brother, who according to him had been convicted in the United Kingdom and deported.

Pollozhani said that he had been asked and given explanations about this situation. He insisted that he had reflected everything in the statement of the figure, but that he had no information about the punishment of the brother-in-law. The subject emphasized that when he was asked about this situation, he had been correct and had provided information in record time to make it available to the Commission.

According to the subject, the decision was given 10 months after he completed the statement of the figure and that he had no information about what had happened.

Judge Pollozhani stated that his brother-in-law is the uncle of his children and that he could not avoid him at family events.

Regarding the professional aspect, there were evidence of non-compliance with the deadline and non-audio recording of the sessions. Out of 23 denunciations made by the public, the subject was asked for explanations for 12 of them.

Reporter Qirko found delays in the process and disruption of the subject's decision-making by the higher courts.

The subject said that the postponements were due to objective circumstances and not because of the court. Regarding the non-audio recording, he said that the reason was the lack of halls. He gave explanations for each of the 12 denunciations, stressing that he had followed the procedure. Also, he added that the High Inspector of Justice had found no violations for the complaints made against him, for which claims were also raised in the KPK.

At the end, judge Ervin Pollozhani asked for confirmation in office. KPK announced that the decision will be announced on July 24, at 09:45./ Reporter.al