The High Inspector of Justice has completed the mainly initiated verification of the information made public in the media, where allegations of ethical violations are raised, provided for by article 102, point 2, letter “dh” of law no. 96/1016 “On the status of judges and prosecutors in the Republic of Albania”, as amended, by the prosecutor Mr. Gjergj Ceka and by the judge Ms. Megi Strakosha, with the lawyer Mr. Ulian Bajrami, during the debate held in the session of 17.10.2025 at the Court of First Instance of General Jurisdiction of Elbasan, for the determination of the security measure against the citizen M. L. (S.), which ended with the arrest of the lawyer.
The High Inspector of Justice preliminarily assesses that the facts (actions or inactions of the magistrate), which may constitute a disciplinary violation, according to the requirements of Law No. 96/2016 “On the Status of Judges and Prosecutors in the Republic of Albania”, as amended, are not only those that are presented on the basis of public information, but are those that are analyzed by the High Inspector of Justice, or assessed on the basis of a verification process or disciplinary investigation. On the basis of public information, a set of facts may be presented, which are alleged to have occurred and which constitute a disciplinary violation, but the High Inspector of Justice may make a precise or different characterization of the facts and actions related to the disciplinary violation, without being linked to the definition that may be claimed in this public information.
In the context of the verification of this case, the High Inspector of Justice has administered from the Court of First Instance of General Jurisdiction in Elbasan, copies of the minutes of the court session, where 14 persons were present, for whom the legality of the arrest in flagrante delicto would be validated and a personal security measure would be assigned. The debate between the lawyer and the prosecutor with questions, answers and frequent mutual interventions between them, began after the questioning of the person under investigation M. L (S.,) who was defended by lawyer Ulian Barjami. The debate between the lawyer and the prosecutor, accompanied from time to time by the intervention of the person under investigation M. S., focused on “the expressions/words spoken by the person under investigation, citizen M. S., to the police officers at the moment of being caught in flagrante delicto”, which also included life-threatening statements. A debate (questions, answers, interventions) was also held between the lawyer and the judge of the case, to clarify the context of the use of these expressions/words towards the police, by the person under investigation protected by him at the moment of being caught red-handed. The debate contained statements by the lawyer that he would personally deal with the prosecutor and all police officers and the prosecutor’s response was that the lawyer would be arrested for these statements. It results that the judge drew the attention of the lawyer and the prosecutor regarding the ethics of behavior towards each other and focus on the facts, emphasizing that they are what convince the court.
In analyzing the actions and inaction of the magistrate in relation to ethical standards and rules of conduct, the High Inspector of Justice assesses that the provisions of Law no. 96/2016 “On the status of judges and prosecutors in the Republic of Albania”, as amended, which provide for disciplinary violations, cannot be interpreted in a limited manner, but must be interpreted and applied in an expanded manner. This is due to the fact that it is not easy to specify the exact content of actions/omissions (behavior) and there is no exhaustive definition, except for the existence of a number of examples defined in the Standards of Ethics and Rules of Conduct of the Prosecutor.
The High Inspector of Justice assesses that the behavior of magistrates remains very important, since the magistrate must have full confidence, must be aware that his function and role cannot be simply a profession, but is a model of behavior or lifestyle, which carries values, which must not only be transmitted, but also be displayed in public at all times. For this reason, magistrates must behave and act at all times in accordance with ethical and moral values.
From the verification of the case:
- It results that the prosecutor did not exercise self-restraint and violated the rules of solemnity and ethics in communication. Taking the floor several times in the session without the permission of the court, despite being a form of reaction prompted by the statements and expressions of the lawyer, was not at the highest level of ethical standards. Ethical standards are not applied only during the fulfillment of duties and respect for the law like any other person, but also by behaving with integrity, honesty, self-restraint and discretion, both during and outside the exercise of duty. The personality of magistrates as well as strict adherence to ethical standards in and outside of work are of extraordinary importance for the credibility of individuals, participants in judicial processes, the justice system as a whole and the authority of state institutions in particular.
- It is taken into account that the reason for the start of the debate and its focus were the expressions used towards the police by the person under investigation at the moment of being caught red-handed, the fact that the defense attorney, in the debate with the prosecutor, raised direct accusations against him regarding one of the allegedly falsified pieces of evidence (during the debate, an expression made by the lawyer was described by the judge as a “threat in the courtroom”), as well as the fact that the situation in the country during this period towards justice officials was serious, due to the murder of Judge A. K.
- It turns out that as a result of the magistrate’s communication not being at the highest level of ethical standards, there were no concrete consequences regarding the exercise of the prosecutor’s function, as well as his role as a magistrate, and the prosecutor’s behavior was isolated and occurred only once and did not create grounds for inappropriate behavior in other similar cases. At the same time, it results that the prosecutor has a seniority in office of 5 years, a relatively short period of his experience as a prosecutor magistrate.
Meanwhile, regarding the behavior of Judge Ms. Megi Strakosha, during the conduct of the session on 17.10.2025, from the verification of the case it is assessed that Judge Ms. Megi Strakosha did not violate the rules of solemnity, the rules of conduct in relations with the parties or the rules of ethics.
- It results that the judge drew the attention of both the prosecutor and the party’s lawyer, as it also results that she requested clarification of the situation from both the lawyer and the prosecutor. The judge has acted in accordance with the provisions of Article 341 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, since her duty was to guarantee respect for the authority of the court, the solemnity of the trial and security in the courtroom, as well as the avoidance of any insults and threats in the trial. When the judge found actions that violated the solemnity of the trial, she warned of consequences, such as the lawyer’s removal from the courtroom and the appointment of another lawyer, in particular, if the lawyer continued with the same communication.
From the analysis of the data collected from the verification, no legal or factual elements are found in advance, which create a reasonable suspicion for the High Inspector of Justice to initiate a disciplinary investigation against the prosecutor magistrate Mr. Gjergji Ceka, acting as prosecutor at the Prosecution Office at the Court of First Instance of General Jurisdiction in Elbasan and against the magistrate judge Ms. Megi Strakosha, acting as judge of the Court of First Instance of General Jurisdiction in Elbasan at the time of the alleged violation. For this reason, the information made public in the media regarding the allegations raised for ethical violations must be archived based on Article 122/4 of this law.
Regarding the violation of the rules of ethics by the magistrate Mr. Gjergji Ceka, the case will be referred to the High Prosecutorial Council to be taken into consideration in the ethical-professional assessment of this magistrate, according to the requirements of Article 77 of Law No. 96/2016 “On the status of judges and prosecutors in the Republic of Albania“, as amended.
