{"id":102672,"date":"2025-01-27T18:34:08","date_gmt":"2025-01-27T18:34:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/rdnews.al\/?p=102672"},"modified":"2025-01-27T18:42:32","modified_gmt":"2025-01-27T18:42:32","slug":"marreveshja-itali-shqiperi-per-emigrantet-cfare-ndodh-tani","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/rdnews.al\/index.php\/2025\/01\/27\/marreveshja-itali-shqiperi-per-emigrantet-cfare-ndodh-tani\/","title":{"rendered":"Marr\u00ebveshja Itali-Shqip\u00ebri p\u00ebr emigrant\u00ebt, \u00e7far\u00eb ndodh tani?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Alvi MUSARAJ<\/strong>
\n– An\u00ebtar i Departamentit t\u00eb Drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb n\u00eb Partin\u00eb Demokratike<\/strong> –<\/p>\n

N\u00eb br\u00ebnd\u00ebsi t\u00eb direktiv\u00ebs s\u00eb BE-s\u00eb p\u00ebrgjigja e mundshme p\u00ebr arsyet e kund\u00ebrta midis gjyqtar\u00ebve dhe qeveris\u00eb italiane.<\/p>\n

Me publikimin n\u00eb italisht t\u00eb vendimit t\u00eb 4 tetorit t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb s\u00eb Bashkimit Evropian, m\u00eb n\u00eb fund \u00ebsht\u00eb e mundur t\u00eb merret nj\u00eb ide se \u00e7far\u00eb than\u00eb gjyqtar\u00ebt e Luksemburgut dhe si ndikon ky vendim n\u00eb mosmarr\u00ebveshjen midis qeveris\u00eb italiane dhe magjistrat\u00ebve. t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Rom\u00ebs q\u00eb shfuqizoi paraburgimin e 12 azilk\u00ebrkuesve n\u00eb qendr\u00ebn shqiptare t\u00eb Gjaderit. Gjykata e Drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb konfirmoi dje pasdite, p\u00ebrmes nj\u00eb z\u00ebdh\u00ebn\u00ebsi, se kur p\u00ebrballet me nj\u00eb aplikant nga nj\u00eb vend i sigurt i caktuar, aplikimi i t\u00eb cilit \u00ebsht\u00eb refuzuar, gjyqtari duhet t\u00eb verifikoj\u00eb legjitimitetin e p\u00ebrcaktimit. Nj\u00eb parim i p\u00ebrgjithsh\u00ebm, tha ai, duke specifikuar m\u00eb pas se “gjykimet e Gjykat\u00ebs jan\u00eb menj\u00ebher\u00eb t\u00eb detyrueshme p\u00ebr Shtetet An\u00ebtare”.<\/p>\n

P\u00ebr gjyqtar\u00ebt dhe qeverin\u00eb, megjithat\u00eb, kufizimi n\u00eb fjal\u00eb ka kuptime t\u00eb ndryshme. N\u00eb nj\u00eb konferenc\u00eb p\u00ebr shtyp pas K\u00ebshillit t\u00eb Ministrave t\u00eb s\u00eb h\u00ebn\u00ebs, Ministri i Drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb Carlo Nordio argumentoi se gjyqtar\u00ebt italian nuk e kishin kuptuar v\u00ebrtet vendimin e Gjykat\u00ebs. Fjal\u00eb q\u00eb u b\u00ebn\u00eb m\u00eb t\u00eb qarta t\u00eb nes\u00ebrmen, n\u00eb ankesat n\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebn e Lart\u00eb q\u00eb Ministria e Brendshme paraqiti kund\u00ebr \u201curdhrave t\u00eb gabuara dhe t\u00eb padrejta\u201d q\u00eb gjoja shtremb\u00ebronin vet\u00eb vendimin e BE-s\u00eb. Pikat e nxehta t\u00eb gjykimit citohen nga t\u00eb dyja pal\u00ebt. Dhe disa po sjellin nj\u00eb propozim nga Komisioni i BE-s\u00eb nga pes\u00ebmb\u00ebdhjet\u00eb vjet m\u00eb par\u00eb. Pozicioni i gjyqtar\u00ebve bazohen kryesisht n\u00eb k\u00ebto kontestime.<\/p>\n

M\u00eb par\u00eb gjykata e Rom\u00ebs nuk vuri n\u00eb fuqi dekretin e ndalimit t\u00eb 12 emigrant\u00ebve q\u00eb ndodheshin n\u00eb Shqip\u00ebri n\u00eb qendrat e diskutueshme t\u00eb azilk\u00ebrkuesve t\u00eb nd\u00ebrtuara atje nga Italia. Or\u00ebt e fundit qeveria ka sulmuar gjykat\u00ebn me tone shum\u00eb t\u00eb ashpra, duke e akuzuar at\u00eb se ka marr\u00eb nj\u00eb vendim me karakter politik. Edhe ministri i Drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb Carlo Nordio tha se sipas tij gjyqtar\u00ebt e Rom\u00ebs mor\u00ebn nj\u00eb vendim q\u00eb ishte jasht\u00eb kompetenc\u00ebs s\u00eb tyre. N\u00eb realitet, gjykata e Rom\u00ebs thjesht konformoi nj\u00eb vendim t\u00eb fundit t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb s\u00eb Bashkimit Evropian, gjykat\u00ebs kryesore t\u00eb Bashkimit, q\u00eb ka t\u00eb b\u00ebj\u00eb pik\u00ebrisht me kategorin\u00eb e personave q\u00eb Italia transportonte drejt qendrave n\u00eb Shqip\u00ebri.<\/p>\n

N\u00eb fakt, qeveria italiane ka vendosur q\u00eb vet\u00ebm emigrant\u00ebt q\u00eb vijn\u00eb nga vendet q\u00eb ajo i konsideron “vendet e sigurta t\u00eb origjin\u00ebs” mund t\u00eb shkojn\u00eb n\u00eb qendrat n\u00eb Shqip\u00ebri, dometh\u00ebn\u00eb q\u00eb respektojn\u00eb lirit\u00eb dhe t\u00eb drejtat civile dhe kan\u00eb nj\u00eb sistem demokratik (ky \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb p\u00ebrkufizimi i parashikuar nga rregulloret aktuale t\u00eb Bashkimit Evropian p\u00ebr Migracionin). N\u00eb thelb: vende nga t\u00eb cilat njer\u00ebzit nuk kan\u00eb arsye t\u00eb bazuara p\u00ebr t\u00eb ikur dhe p\u00ebr t\u00eb k\u00ebrkuar azil n\u00eb Itali. P\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb arsye, prej nj\u00eb viti e gjysm\u00eb, Italia ka parashikuar p\u00ebr emigrant\u00ebt q\u00eb vijn\u00eb nga vende \u201ct\u00eb sigurta\u201d nj\u00eb procedur\u00eb t\u00eb p\u00ebrshpejtuar t\u00eb shqyrtimit t\u00eb k\u00ebrkes\u00ebs s\u00eb tyre p\u00ebr azil, e cila p\u00ebrfshin nj\u00eb ekzaminim t\u00eb p\u00ebrmbledhur dhe mbi t\u00eb gjitha ndalimin n\u00eb nj\u00eb qend\u00ebr emigrant\u00ebsh. P\u00ebr m\u00eb tep\u00ebr, personat e destinuar p\u00ebr n\u00eb qendrat n\u00eb Shqip\u00ebri duhet t\u00eb jen\u00eb burra me sh\u00ebndet t\u00eb mir\u00eb dhe jo gra, f\u00ebmij\u00eb apo njer\u00ebz t\u00eb brisht\u00eb.<\/p>\n

Qeveria s\u00eb fundmi zgjeroi list\u00ebn e vendeve q\u00eb i konsideron t\u00eb sigurta, duke p\u00ebrfshir\u00eb Egjiptin dhe Bangladeshin, dy vende nga t\u00eb cilat mij\u00ebra azilk\u00ebrkues mb\u00ebrrijn\u00eb n\u00eb Itali \u00e7do vit. T\u00eb 12 personat n\u00eb Shqip\u00ebri vinin nga Egjipti dhe Bangladeshi. Vendimi i Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb dh\u00ebn\u00eb m\u00eb 4 tetor dhe nuk ka t\u00eb b\u00ebj\u00eb me Italin\u00eb, as me Egjiptin dhe Bangladeshin, por \u00ebsht\u00eb shprehur me k\u00ebrkes\u00eb t\u00eb Republik\u00ebs \u00c7eke n\u00eb lidhje me rastin e nj\u00eb shtetasi moldav. Ankuesi n\u00eb fjal\u00eb kishte aplikuar p\u00ebr azil n\u00eb Republik\u00ebn \u00c7eke, kur Moldavia konsiderohet nj\u00eb “vend i sigurt” me p\u00ebrjashtim t\u00eb Transnistris\u00eb, brezi i tok\u00ebs n\u00eb kufirin me Ukrain\u00ebn, i konsideruar jasht\u00eb kontrollit t\u00eb qeveris\u00eb moldave. K\u00ebrkesa e burrit u refuzua, por duke qen\u00eb se azilk\u00ebrkuesi vinte nga Transnistria, gjykata rajonale e Brno k\u00ebrkoi mendimin e Gjykat\u00ebs Evropiane t\u00eb Drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb p\u00ebr t\u00eb kuptuar n\u00ebse ai mund ta konsideronte v\u00ebrtet\u00eb Moldavin\u00eb nj\u00eb vend “t\u00eb sigurt”.<\/p>\n

Nj\u00eb element tjet\u00ebr q\u00eb vuri n\u00eb pik\u00ebpyetje statusin e Moldavis\u00eb si nj\u00eb vend i sigurt ishte fakti se vendi kishte k\u00ebrkuar t\u00eb shmangte detyrimet e Konvent\u00ebs Evropiane p\u00ebr t\u00eb Drejtat e Njeriut (KEDNJ), traktati m\u00eb i r\u00ebnd\u00ebsish\u00ebm evropian n\u00eb fush\u00ebn e t\u00eb drejtave t\u00eb njeriut. \u00cbsht\u00eb nj\u00eb klauzol\u00eb e parashikuar n\u00eb nenin 15 p\u00ebr vendet n\u00eb luft\u00eb ose n\u00eb situata t\u00eb tjera emergjente. Pyetjet p\u00ebr t\u00eb cilat Gjykata duhej t\u00eb shprehte mendimin e saj ishin tre: n\u00ebse nj\u00eb vend mund t\u00eb konsiderohet i sigurt vet\u00ebm n\u00eb disa pjes\u00eb t\u00eb territorit t\u00eb tij; n\u00ebse mund t\u00eb konsiderohet i sigurt pavar\u00ebsisht se i \u00ebsht\u00eb drejtuar nenit 15 t\u00eb KEDNJ (ECHR); dhe n\u00ebse, n\u00ebse \u00ebsht\u00eb e nevojshme, organet kompetente gjyq\u00ebsore duhet t\u00eb rishikojn\u00eb kualifikimin e “vendit t\u00eb sigurt” kur plot\u00ebsohen nj\u00eb ose t\u00eb dy nga dy kushtet e para.<\/p>\n

Gjykata vendosi se nj\u00eb vend nuk pushon s\u00eb qeni i sigurt vet\u00ebm sepse i \u00ebsht\u00eb drejtuar nenit 15 t\u00eb KEDNJ-s\u00eb, por p\u00ebr t\u00eb qen\u00eb i sigurt duhet t\u00eb jet\u00eb i sigurt n\u00eb t\u00eb gjith\u00eb territorin e tij n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb homogjene dhe p\u00ebr t\u00eb gjith\u00eb njer\u00ebzit q\u00eb jetojn\u00eb atje. Ajo gjithashtu vendosi se kualifikimi i nj\u00eb vendi t\u00eb sigurt duhet t\u00eb verifikohet dhe rishikohet nga nj\u00eb gjyqtar n\u00eb momentin e \u00e7do vendimi dhe p\u00ebr \u00e7do rast individual jo n\u00eb t\u00ebr\u00ebsi, thjesht miratimi i nj\u00eb liste t\u00eb vendeve t\u00eb sigurta nga nj\u00eb shtet nuk mjafton. N\u00eb baz\u00eb t\u00eb t\u00eb gjitha k\u00ebtyre deklarimeve, gjykata e Rom\u00ebs b\u00ebri t\u00eb ditur se nuk mund t\u00eb v\u00ebrtetonte ndalimin e emigrant\u00ebve pik\u00ebrisht n\u00eb baz\u00eb t\u00eb vendimit t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb t\u00eb 4 tetorit, sepse Bangladeshi dhe Egjipti nuk jan\u00eb vende n\u00eb t\u00eb cilat respektohet t\u00eb drejtat jan\u00eb t\u00eb garantuara n\u00eb t\u00eb gjith\u00eb territorin dhe ndaj \u00e7do kategorie njer\u00ebzish.<\/p>\n

N\u00eb t\u00eb dy vendet, aktivist\u00ebt politik\u00eb t\u00eb opozit\u00ebs shpesh persekutohen dhe ka ligje shum\u00eb t\u00eb rrepta kund\u00ebr atyre q\u00eb i p\u00ebrkasin komunitetit LGBTQ+. E drejta e Bashkimit Evropian ka ep\u00ebrsi mbi ligjin italian, sipas Kushtetut\u00ebs, dhe p\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb arsye gjykata e Rom\u00ebs hodhi posht\u00eb vlefshm\u00ebrin\u00eb e ndalimit t\u00eb 12 emigrant\u00ebve, duke argumentuar se vendet e tyre t\u00eb origjin\u00ebs nuk mund t\u00eb p\u00ebrkufizohen si “t\u00eb sigurta” dhe qeveria italiane nuk mund t\u00eb shqyrtojn\u00eb k\u00ebrkesat e tyre p\u00ebr azil me “procedur\u00ebn e p\u00ebrshpejtuar”, e cila p\u00ebrfshin ndalimin. P\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb arsye ai urdh\u00ebroi lirimin e tyre. Bazuar n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb interpretim t\u00eb gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Rom\u00ebs, i gjith\u00eb projekti p\u00ebr t\u00eb \u201ckontraktuar\u201d dhe eksternalizuar menaxhimin e emigrant\u00ebve n\u00eb Shqip\u00ebri rrezikon t\u00eb komprometohet: shumica d\u00ebrrmuese e emigrant\u00ebve q\u00eb tentojn\u00eb t\u00eb mb\u00ebrrijn\u00eb n\u00eb Itali p\u00ebrmes detit vijn\u00eb nga vende n\u00eb luft\u00eb ose ku dhuna \u00ebsht\u00eb e p\u00ebrhapur, ose nga vende t\u00eb cilat, sipas vendimit t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb, v\u00ebshtir\u00eb se mund t\u00eb p\u00ebrkufizohen si “plot\u00ebsisht t\u00eb sigurta”.<\/p>\n

Mir\u00ebpo mbi baz\u00ebn e k\u00ebtij p\u00ebrkufizimi ligjor gati 90% e t\u00eb gjith\u00eb emigrant\u00ebve q\u00eb shkojn\u00eb n\u00eb Itali jan\u00eb t\u00eb p\u00ebrfshir\u00eb. Kur \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb vend i sigurt? N\u00eb fakt, Direktiva e BE-s\u00eb 2013\/32 p\u00ebrshkruan kushtet p\u00ebr p\u00ebrcaktimin e nj\u00eb vendi t\u00eb sigurt, n\u00eb nenin 37 (Aneksi 1, paragrafi 1): “Nj\u00eb vend konsiderohet vend i sigurt i origjin\u00ebs n\u00ebse, n\u00eb baz\u00eb t\u00eb statusit ligjor, zbatimi i ligjit brenda nj\u00eb sistemi demokratik dhe situat\u00ebs s\u00eb p\u00ebrgjithshme politike, mund t\u00eb tregohet se n\u00eb p\u00ebrgjith\u00ebsi dhe n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb konsistente nuk ka asnj\u00eb persekutim si\u00e7 p\u00ebrcaktohet n\u00eb nenin 9 t\u00eb Direktiv\u00ebs 2011\/95\/BE, as tortur\u00eb apo forma t\u00eb tjera nd\u00ebshkimi apo trajtimi \u00e7njer\u00ebzor. ose degradues, as rrezik p\u00ebr shkak t\u00eb dhun\u00ebs pa dallim n\u00eb situata t\u00eb konfliktit t\u00eb armatosur t\u00eb brendsh\u00ebm ose nd\u00ebrkomb\u00ebtar” P\u00ebrcaktimi i vendit t\u00eb sigurt \u00ebsht\u00eb thelb\u00ebsor sepse \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb paramet\u00ebr par\u00ebsor n\u00eb procedur\u00ebn kufitare p\u00ebr vler\u00ebsimin e k\u00ebrkesave p\u00ebr azil. P\u00ebr shembull, rregullorja e re parashikon procedur\u00ebn e p\u00ebrshpejtuar t\u00eb ekzaminimit (dhe refuzimit) n\u00ebse vjen nga nj\u00eb vend i sigurt origjine ose nga nj\u00eb vend me nj\u00eb p\u00ebrqindje pranimi t\u00eb k\u00ebrkesave p\u00ebr mbrojtje nd\u00ebrkomb\u00ebtare m\u00eb pak se 20%.<\/p>\n

1 \u2013 Paraburgimi p\u00ebr efekt t\u00eb shqyrtimit t\u00eb p\u00ebrshpejtuar t\u00eb k\u00ebrkes\u00ebs p\u00ebr azil, procedura e aplikuar p\u00ebr aplikant\u00ebt n\u00eb Shqip\u00ebri p\u00ebr shkak se vijn\u00eb nga vende q\u00eb Italia i konsideron t\u00eb sigurta, duhet t\u00eb v\u00ebrtetohet brenda 48 or\u00ebve nga Gjykata kompetente e Rom\u00ebs. \u201cNeni 37 i Direktiv\u00ebs 2013\/32 duhet t\u00eb interpretohet si ndalim i nj\u00eb vendi t\u00eb tret\u00eb q\u00eb t\u00eb caktohet si vend i sigurt i origjin\u00ebs, kur pjes\u00eb t\u00eb caktuara t\u00eb territorit t\u00eb tij nuk plot\u00ebsojn\u00eb kushtet thelb\u00ebsore p\u00ebr nj\u00eb p\u00ebrcaktim t\u00eb till\u00eb\u201d, shkruajn\u00eb gjyqtar\u00ebt n\u00eb vendimet e tyre duke cituar pik\u00ebn 83 vendimit t\u00eb BE-s\u00eb. Duke shtuar m\u00eb tej se “vendimi sqaron se parimi i deklaruar n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb duhet t\u00eb zbatohet edhe n\u00eb rastet kur kategori t\u00eb caktuara njer\u00ebzish p\u00ebrjashtohen”.<\/p>\n

N\u00eb rastin e t\u00eb ndaluarve n\u00eb Shqip\u00ebri, vendet e origjin\u00ebs jan\u00eb Egjipti dhe Bangladeshi, q\u00eb t\u00eb dyja konsiderohen t\u00eb sigurta nga qeveria Meloni me p\u00ebrjashtim t\u00eb disa kategorive t\u00eb caktuar t\u00eb personave q\u00eb konsiderohen n\u00eb rrezik. Sipas gjyqtar\u00ebve italian, neni 37 i Direktiv\u00ebs aktuale europiane 32\/2013 duhet lexuar n\u00eb kuptimin q\u00eb nj\u00eb vend \u00ebsht\u00eb i sigurt p\u00ebr t\u00eb gjith\u00eb ose nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb i sigurt p\u00ebr ask\u00ebnd. Dhe kjo sepse, shkruajn\u00eb ata, duke shfuqizuar plot\u00ebsisht direktiv\u00ebn e m\u00ebparshme, kjo aktuale do t’i anulonte t\u00eb dyja hipotezat. Nj\u00eb lexim q\u00eb do t\u00eb gjente konfirmim n\u00eb pik\u00ebn 71 ku vendimi i BE-s\u00eb imponon nj\u00eb “interpretim kufizues” t\u00eb nenit 37, i motivuar nga fakti se origjina e aplikantit nga nj\u00eb vend i konsideruar i sigurt lejon shqyrtimin e p\u00ebrshpejtuar t\u00eb aplikimit t\u00eb tij, m\u00eb t\u00eb shpejt\u00eb, por me p\u00ebrjashtime q\u00eb zvog\u00ebloni disa garanci.<\/p>\n

Pozicioni i qeveris\u00eb Meloni<\/strong><\/p>\n

Dekreti i ri i qeveris\u00eb, i nxjerr\u00eb p\u00ebr t\u00eb futur n\u00eb nj\u00eb ligj primar list\u00ebn e vendeve t\u00eb sigurta nga t\u00eb cilat jan\u00eb eliminuar Kameruni, Kolumbia dhe Nigeria. Zgjedhja, shpjegoi qeveria, respekton vendimin e Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb BE-s\u00eb. Kuptimi kuptohet m\u00eb mir\u00eb n\u00eb ankesat n\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebn e Lart\u00eb q\u00eb kund\u00ebrshtojn\u00eb vendimet e gjyqtar\u00ebve n\u00eb Rom\u00eb. \u201cMegjithat\u00eb, n\u00eb vendimin e dat\u00ebs 4 tetor 2024, nuk ka asnj\u00eb referenc\u00eb p\u00ebr mund\u00ebsin\u00eb q\u00eb shtetet t\u00eb specifikojn\u00eb, n\u00eb flet\u00ebt bashkangjitur dekreteve q\u00eb caktojn\u00eb vendet e origjin\u00ebs s\u00eb sigurt, informacion shtes\u00eb n\u00eb lidhje me kategori t\u00eb caktuara subjektesh, n\u00eb lidhje me t\u00eb cilat jan\u00eb \u00e7\u00ebshtje kritike n\u00eb respektim t\u00eb t\u00eb drejtave, pa n\u00ebnkuptuar ekzistenc\u00ebn e p\u00ebrjashtimeve territoriale\u201d, shkruajn\u00eb avokat\u00ebt n\u00eb apelimet n\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebn Europiane t\u00eb t\u00eb Drejtave t\u00eb Njeriut. Teza \u00ebsht\u00eb pik\u00ebrisht e kund\u00ebrta.<\/p>\n

Meqen\u00ebse vendimi lind nga pyetja e nj\u00eb gjyqtari t\u00eb Republik\u00ebs \u00c7eke p\u00ebr mund\u00ebsin\u00eb e p\u00ebrjashtimit t\u00eb pjes\u00ebve t\u00eb territorit, dhe Gjykata e BE-s\u00eb i p\u00ebrmend vet\u00ebm k\u00ebto, nuk ka asnj\u00eb arsye p\u00ebr t\u00eb besuar se vetoja p\u00ebr p\u00ebrjashtimet territoriale duhet t\u00eb ket\u00eb t\u00eb b\u00ebj\u00eb gjithashtu me “mund\u00ebsin\u00eb t\u00eb p\u00ebrjashtimeve q\u00eb kan\u00eb t\u00eb b\u00ebjn\u00eb me kategorit\u00eb e l\u00ebnd\u00ebve\u201d. P\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb arsye, ankesat e konsiderojn\u00eb si t\u00eb munguar motivimin e gjyqtar\u00ebve. Sepse n\u00ebse mbetet mund\u00ebsia e p\u00ebrjashtimit t\u00eb kategorive t\u00eb njer\u00ebzve, at\u00ebher\u00eb do t\u00eb duhet t\u00eb argumentoj pranin\u00eb e \u201carsyeve serioze\u201d q\u00eb e b\u00ebjn\u00eb vendin e origjin\u00ebs nj\u00eb vend t\u00eb pasigurt p\u00ebr aplikantin individual.<\/p>\n

Nj\u00eb lexim q\u00eb synon t\u00eb legjitimoj\u00eb list\u00ebn e re t\u00eb vendeve t\u00eb sigurta, ku mbeten ato q\u00eb p\u00ebrjashtojn\u00eb disa kategori subjektesh, p\u00ebrfshir\u00eb Egjiptin dhe Bangladeshin. Dhe p\u00ebr t\u00eb nj\u00ebjtat arsye qeveria italiane kund\u00ebrshton vendimet e gjyqtar\u00ebve duke i k\u00ebrkuar Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Kasacionit t’i anuloj\u00eb ato.<\/p>\n

Neni 37 i Direktiv\u00ebs 32\/2013 \u2013 P\u00ebrpara se t\u00eb lexoni disa pasazhe t\u00eb vendimit t\u00eb BE-s\u00eb, \u00ebsht\u00eb e nevojshme t\u00eb njihni tekstin e nenit 37 tashm\u00eb t\u00eb njohur p\u00ebr \u201cP\u00ebrcaktimin komb\u00ebtar t\u00eb vendeve t\u00eb treta si vende t\u00eb sigurta t\u00eb origjin\u00ebs\u201d. K\u00ebto jan\u00eb vet\u00ebm disa rreshta, p\u00ebr t\u00eb kuptuar se \u00e7far\u00eb thot\u00eb dhe \u00e7far\u00eb ndalohet: \u201cShtetet an\u00ebtare mund t\u00eb mbajn\u00eb ose aprovojn\u00eb legjislacionin q\u00eb lejon, n\u00eb p\u00ebrputhje me Aneksin I, p\u00ebrcaktimin n\u00eb nivel komb\u00ebtar t\u00eb vendeve t\u00eb sigurta t\u00eb origjin\u00ebs p\u00ebr q\u00ebllime t\u00eb shqyrtimit t\u00eb k\u00ebrkesave p\u00ebr mbrojtje nd\u00ebrkomb\u00ebtare\u201d, thot\u00eb paragrafi i par\u00eb, t\u00eb cilit vijojn\u00eb tre nene t\u00eb tjera p\u00ebr nevoj\u00ebn. t\u00eb rishikoj\u00eb periodikisht vendet e sigurta, mbi burimet q\u00eb duhen konsultuar p\u00ebr p\u00ebrcaktimin e tyre dhe p\u00ebr detyrimin p\u00ebr t\u00eb njoftuar Komisionin p\u00ebr list\u00ebn e famshme.<\/p>\n

Teksti aktual \u00ebsht\u00eb rezultat i reform\u00ebs s\u00eb nenit 30 t\u00eb Direktiv\u00ebs s\u00eb m\u00ebparshme t\u00eb 2005\/85. Kjo citohet n\u00eb vendimin e Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb BE-s\u00eb n\u00eb pik\u00ebn 73: \u201cKy nen 30 parashikonte shprehimisht se Shtetet An\u00ebtare mund t\u00eb caktonin gjithashtu nj\u00eb pjes\u00eb t\u00eb territorit t\u00eb nj\u00eb vendi t\u00eb tret\u00eb si t\u00eb sigurt\u201d. P\u00ebr m\u00eb tep\u00ebr, paragrafi i tret\u00eb parashikonte gjithashtu mund\u00ebsin\u00eb “p\u00ebr t\u00eb p\u00ebrcaktuar nj\u00eb vend ose nj\u00eb pjes\u00eb t\u00eb tij si t\u00eb sigurt p\u00ebr nj\u00eb grup t\u00eb caktuar personash n\u00eb at\u00eb vend”. Por si\u00e7 thot\u00eb MPB-ja n\u00eb ankesat e saj, n\u00eb vendimin e Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb BE-s\u00eb nuk p\u00ebrmendet. Gjyqtar\u00ebt evropian\u00eb n\u00eb vend t\u00eb k\u00ebsaj shtojn\u00eb se direktiva aktuale 32 e vitit 2013 \u201cka shfuqizuar direktiv\u00ebn 2005\/85, neni 30 i s\u00eb cil\u00ebs, si\u00e7 tregohet n\u00eb tabel\u00ebn korrelative n\u00eb Aneksin III t\u00eb Direktiv\u00ebs 2013\/32, \u00ebsht\u00eb z\u00ebvend\u00ebsuar me nenin 37 t\u00eb k\u00ebsaj t\u00eb fundit. Epo, n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb artikull t\u00eb fundit nuk ka m\u00eb mund\u00ebsi t\u00eb cil\u00ebsohet nj\u00eb pjes\u00eb e territorit t\u00eb nj\u00eb vendi t\u00eb tret\u00eb si t\u00eb sigurt\u201d. Deri n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb pik\u00eb nuk duhet t\u00eb ket\u00eb asnj\u00eb dyshim: p\u00ebr Gjykat\u00ebn e BE-s\u00eb, direktiva aktuale nuk lejon p\u00ebrcaktimin e nj\u00eb vendi t\u00eb sigurt duke p\u00ebrjashtuar pjes\u00eb t\u00eb territorit. Por n\u00ebse p\u00ebr gjyqtar\u00ebt ndalimi vlen edhe p\u00ebr p\u00ebrjashtimin e kategorive t\u00eb njer\u00ebzve, p\u00ebr qeverin\u00eb nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb k\u00ebshtu.<\/p>\n

Propozimi i Komisionit t\u00eb BE-s\u00eb \u2013 P\u00ebr t\u00eb sqaruar pikat e m\u00ebparshme t\u00eb vendimit, Gjykata citon nj\u00eb shpjegim q\u00eb, n\u00eb vitin 2009, Komisioni i BE-s\u00eb i kishte dh\u00ebn\u00eb K\u00ebshillit t\u00eb Bashkimit Evropian n\u00eb lidhje me reform\u00ebn q\u00eb do t\u00eb \u00e7onte n\u00eb direktiv\u00ebn e re 32\/ 2013, e njohur m\u00eb mir\u00eb si \u201cdirektiva e procedurave\u201d. Komisioni \u201cp\u00ebrmend shprehimisht d\u00ebshir\u00ebn p\u00ebr t\u00eb shfuqizuar pushtetin\u201d p\u00ebr t\u00eb shpallur nj\u00eb vend t\u00eb sigurt, p\u00ebrve\u00e7 pjes\u00ebve t\u00eb territorit t\u00eb tij (pika 76). N\u00eb t\u00eb nj\u00ebjtin shpjegim, Komisioni propozoi gjithashtu eliminimin e mund\u00ebsis\u00eb, q\u00eb u ishte dh\u00ebn\u00eb deri at\u00ebher\u00eb Shteteve An\u00ebtare, “p\u00ebr t\u00eb zbatuar konceptin p\u00ebr nj\u00eb grup specifik n\u00eb at\u00eb vend ose pjes\u00eb t\u00eb tij”.<\/p>\n

M\u00ebnyra se si ligjv\u00ebn\u00ebsi evropian ka punuar n\u00eb tekstin e rregullores p\u00ebrmendet edhe n\u00eb aktvendimin e Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb. Akoma p\u00ebr p\u00ebrjashtimin e pjes\u00ebve t\u00eb territorit, vendimi thot\u00eb se \u201cq\u00ebllimi p\u00ebr t\u00eb shtypur k\u00ebt\u00eb fakultet rezulton nga vet\u00eb teksti i amendamentit t\u00eb nenit 30, paragrafi 1, i Direktiv\u00ebs 2005\/85 q\u00eb p\u00ebrmban propozimi i Komisionit p\u00ebr Parlamentin Evropian. Direktiva dhe e K\u00ebshillit (faqe 57.) ku ky opsion \u00ebsht\u00eb tejkaluar shprehimisht dhe qart\u00ebsisht n\u00eb shumic\u00ebn e versioneve gjuh\u00ebsore dhe \u00ebsht\u00eb eliminuar n\u00eb versionet e tjera\u201d (pika 75).<\/p>\n

P\u00ebr t\u00eb kuptuar se \u00e7far\u00eb thot\u00eb neni 37 i Direktiv\u00ebs aktuale, \u00e7far\u00eb lejon dhe \u00e7far\u00eb nuk lejon m\u00eb, Gjykata na fton t\u00eb kontrollojm\u00eb pjes\u00ebt e nenit 30 t\u00eb vjet\u00ebr q\u00eb neni 37 i ri ka fshir\u00eb. Jo vet\u00ebm teksti q\u00eb ka t\u00eb b\u00ebj\u00eb me pjes\u00eb t\u00eb territorit, por edhe teksti p\u00ebr mund\u00ebsin\u00eb e “p\u00ebrcaktimit t\u00eb nj\u00eb vendi ose nj\u00eb pjese t\u00eb tij si t\u00eb sigurt p\u00ebr nj\u00eb grup t\u00eb caktuar njer\u00ebzish n\u00eb at\u00eb vend” \u00ebsht\u00eb g\u00ebrvishtur. Sipas Gjykat\u00ebs, fjal\u00ebt e kryq\u00ebzuara pasqyrojn\u00eb synimin e ligjv\u00ebn\u00ebsit evropian p\u00ebr t\u00eb th\u00ebn\u00eb at\u00eb q\u00eb direktiva e re e vitit 2013 nuk do t\u00eb lejonte m\u00eb. Nj\u00eb pik\u00eb q\u00eb duket vendimtare. Por vet\u00ebm p\u00ebr gjyqtar\u00ebt dhe jo p\u00ebr qeverin\u00eb. P\u00ebr ta ditur me siguri do t\u00eb duhet t\u00eb presim opinionin e Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Kasacionit p\u00ebr ankesat e Ministris\u00eb s\u00eb Brendshme ose, me shum\u00eb gjasa, referimin e m\u00ebpassh\u00ebm n\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebn Kushtetuese ose, t\u00eb vet\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb BE-s\u00eb.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Alvi MUSARAJ – An\u00ebtar i Departamentit t\u00eb Drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb n\u00eb Partin\u00eb Demokratike – N\u00eb br\u00ebnd\u00ebsi t\u00eb direktiv\u00ebs s\u00eb BE-s\u00eb p\u00ebrgjigja e mundshme p\u00ebr arsyet e kund\u00ebrta midis gjyqtar\u00ebve dhe qeveris\u00eb italiane. Me publikimin n\u00eb italisht t\u00eb vendimit t\u00eb 4 tetorit t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb s\u00eb Bashkimit Evropian, m\u00eb n\u00eb fund \u00ebsht\u00eb e mundur t\u00eb merret nj\u00eb …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":102676,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[37],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-102672","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","","category-politike"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/rdnews.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/102672","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/rdnews.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/rdnews.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rdnews.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rdnews.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=102672"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/rdnews.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/102672\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":102674,"href":"https:\/\/rdnews.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/102672\/revisions\/102674"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rdnews.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/102676"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/rdnews.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=102672"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rdnews.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=102672"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rdnews.al\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=102672"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}