Ina Rama sues the HCJ

The former Prosecutor General also requires the HCJ to pay all salaries she should have taken as judge since 2012, and compensate her for the moral damage caused by offenses launched against her during the meeting.

Mrs.Rama reminds in her lawsuit that after leaving the post as Prosecutor General in January, she requested the HCJ and President to appoint her at the Court of Appeal of Tiarna, as a post equal to the one she had at the Court of Serious Crimes, in order to avoid the conflict of interest which derives from the signing of investigations during the time she was acting as PG.

Rama underlines that after the request, since January 2013, she has not received any answer or communication from the HCJ, and her case was not included in the agenda, although the HCJ has held dozens of meetings and appointed judges for vacancies at the Court of Appeal.

For the Chairman of the HCJ, Ina Rama says:

“The President, as Chairman of the High Council of Justice, the authority that legally decides the daily agenda of the HCJ, has repetitively and publicly declared that the request made by Ina Rama to be appointed as Judge at the Court of Appal is not legally founded, and that if she wanted to get appointed, she should follow the competition procedures with the same conditions as the other judges. Seeing that there is no answer from the HCJ and the President for more than 11 months, the plaintiff has officially addressed once again to the President and the Minister of Justice with her concern regarding the legal uncertainty created during the time that her request for being appointed as judge would remain untreated by the HCJ”.

As for the decision that rejected her request, the former Prosecutor General declared that the HCJ should decide for the for the appointment at the Court of Appeal not only by respecting the law, but also based on the vacancies in this Court. The lawsuit says that there were ten vacencies at the Court of Appeal when Rama made the request, and on the day of the review there were five other vacancies.
As for the decision presented by the HCJ that Rama should have to compete for her post in the Court of Appeal, since she had been worked at the Appeal of Serious Crimes, the Prosecution said that this argument of the HCJ is an open challenge to the law. Rama says that HCJ has been completely contradictory with their arguments.

“If it was possible for me to compete, that could have happened if there were two former Prosecutor Generals wanting the same place”, she added with irony.

The former Prosecutor General adds that the HCJ members are contradictory about this decision, since they are still judges of the Court of First Degree or of the appeal, and some others are candidates to be appointed at the Tirana Court of Appeal.

Rama insisted that she had been suffering moral damage, since some members of the HCJ, such as Gjin Gjoni, have given personal opinions and have not said the truth about the complaint that she deposited at the HCJ.

“These HCJ members have clearly expressed untrue and denigrating circumstances about the suing person, since the Council was reviewing the request after more than one year,. These members have commented on the content of the request.  The plaintiff also raises the concern that her request has not been reviewed for this long time, and the plaintiff asks for the reasons of this action”, Rama’s lawsuit says.

Top Channel