) There are some problems, Shala: Bureau Bill uses vague formulas, space for interpretation

In an interview for the “Justice Trust”, Shala clarified that the Bureau would have the mandate to initiate procedures against public officials and former public officials, but said the bill contains provisions requiring clarification.

“Biro is the initiator of cases, meaning that he collects other evidence against all public officials and former public officials. Now there are some problems here that are also recorded in the report”, Shala said.

He said the bill allows verification to include property acquired up to five years after the end of public office, while the procedure could be initiated until ten years after leaving office.

Even if a person has completed his task... the procedure to him may begin, but the problem is that his wealth is not valued only until the time he was an official, but it can be extended for the next five years by 2022 and that's why he appreciates the fortunes gained during the time when the person in question was not official”, he said.

According to Shala, another problem is that the bill uses vague formulas, which leave room for interpretation.

“says that it can extend the deadline if wealth is to a greater extent than what it means to a greater extent, the bill does not specify”, he said.

Speaking of the consequences of the seizure, Shala explained that the bill does not envision criminal sanctions for the official, but only the seizure of unwarranted property.

With the official who eventually gets his fortune there's no sanction for him. But it is simply considered, in principle, that the share of property that is unwarranted is confiscated, he stated.

However, he said that in cases where elements of the criminal act are identified during the procedure, the prosecution must take action.

“Normically that if any cases that have great disproportionation are confirmed, there are other criminal indicators, definitely the prosecution should be taken even in criminal terms”, Shala said.

He reversed the IKD's stance that establishing this mechanism does not replace criminal procedure.

This is the problem. That's why we're going back to her first... can't a supplemental system to serve as a basis that you're punishing people while you failed in criminal procedure”, he said.

Shala also raised concern about the protection of citizens who may have bought confidential property from persons who later come under investigation.

The problem is that in the end you bought a flat and you thought that if I bought a free house... that he didn't justify the property taking over from you even though you weren't an official person, you didn't have any relationship with him, he said.

According to him, the bill also contains formulas that require judicial and linguistic improvement, while some presumptions may violate citizens' legal security.

At the end of the interview, Shala also spoke of cases when the Bureau fails to testify that wealth is unwarranted. He said the bill does not guarantee sufficient protection for persons who had property blocked during the procedure.

The law does not allow the court to review these measures periodically, if still necessary, are they proportional. This is extremely problematic and is contrary to the European Court for Human Rights jurisdiction, he said.

He added that provisions for compensation for the damage are unclear and do not determine institutional responsibility.

The certificate relations law could not cover all these situations. Who should be ignorant here? Should it be the Bureau? Should the Court Be? And all these situations cannot be covered through the provisions of the Law on Obligations Relations”, Shala said.

In conclusion, he called for prior to the adoption of the bill to address all shortcomings that could violate citizens' rights.

No matter what its goal is, the Government and the Parliament must then be clear about a law that has a very broad range of its scope and has a very high potential for human rights violations in property intervention. For this reason, if it is political will to be adopted by law, it must definitely be taken care of to the last detail that this law does not create judicial uncertainty among citizens”, Shala concluded. /Periscope