Haradinaj: The 53 million split decision for “Bechtel-Ekan” was fair

Former Prime Minister Ramush Haradinaj, in the quality of the witness, said that based on domestic decision-making procedures for closing the project, he considers the decision to resolve the issue with “Bechtel-Ekan” right. “Yes, based on internal decision-making procedures for closing the project that was on the table. The reason is that the project in question, in [...]
Former Prime Minister Ramush Haradinaj, in the quality of the witness, said that based on domestic decision-making procedures for closing the project, he considers the decision to resolve the issue with “Bechtel-Ekan” right.
“Yes, based on internal decision-making procedures for closing the project that was on the table. The reason is that the project in question, in the situation at that time, could not go on without defining the conclusion to the financial obligation”, Haradinaj said, responding to the indictee Eset Berisha's question about whether he considers it to have been the right decision to resolve the case with “Bechtel-Ekan”.
While asked whether he feels insane or deceived by Minister Pal Lekaj, Haradinaj said the chairman of the government makes decisions on the basis of raising the case in his stages.
The honoured “court judges of the court, the chairman of the Government makes decisions on the basis of raising the case on its own stages”, Haradinaj said.
Haradinaj said the decision-making is only the representative of the decision, minister or replacement.
The decision's sole representative. Minister or delegate from the minister in this case. The right to help with expertise usually comes from the ministry's secretary general, professional advisers or those related to the topic that has been in practice for more people. So all of them are those who were at the time”, he added.
When asked whether he considers having had all the support materials needed for making the government's decision to approve Bechtel-Enkas' request, the question was rejected by prosecutor Att and Dema.
The prosecutor said that opposition is based on the way the question is presented, because the witness cannot be asked if he considers accepting sufficient documents. /Betimibility. com












