State Advocacy has responded to the article titled “Money and the President – Bekim Sejdiu Won a Tender at Donika Gërvalla’s Ministry Four Months Ago,” as well as yesterday’s reports by other media outlets on the same issue. The institution described the published findings as untrue and inaccurate.
According to State Advocacy, the claim that Prof. Dr. Bekim Sejdiu “benefited from a tender at the Ministry of Justice” misrepresents the nature of his engagement and the procedure through which it was carried out.
Të lidhura
None found
Sejdiu was engaged as a local expert in two international arbitration proceedings, at the proposal of the international law firms representing and defending the interests of the Republic of Kosovo. State Advocacy stresses that this engagement was carried out in accordance with public procurement rules.
The economic operator “Legalis SSM L.L.C” is engaged in these two international arbitration proceedings, in which the interests of the Republic of Kosovo are represented.
The institution explains that, in international arbitration cases, international law firms determine the necessary expertise and the profile of the local expert, depending on the nature of the matter and the requirements of the proceedings.
In this particular case, the proposal to engage Prof. Dr. Bekim Sejdiu came from the international law firms representing Kosovo in these proceedings. For this reason, State Advocacy considers it inaccurate to portray this engagement as a “tender obtained from the Ministry of Justice” or as an action undertaken for a specific personal benefit, since such wording creates a false perception among the public.
State Advocacy, which operates as an agency within the Ministry of Justice, has continuously engaged local experts for arbitration proceedings. These engagements have also included university professors from various fields, while the same procedures have been followed in every case.
According to the clarification, the entire procedure for engaging the experts was conducted in accordance with public procurement rules and procedures. The contracts concluded are framework contracts for the provision of professional services in international arbitration proceedings.
The framework contracts provide for services that may be offered over a two-year period. They do not mean that the entire specified amount is paid automatically, as payments are made only for professional services actually performed in the respective arbitration proceedings.
These services may include preparing written expert opinions, responding to the opposing party’s arguments and claims, participating in arbitration hearings, as well as other professional services related to the case.
State Advocacy also explains that the amounts specified in the framework contract are not intended solely for the local expert. A considerable portion is allocated to international experts, whose identities and details cannot be made public because of the confidentiality rules applicable to international arbitration proceedings.
The Ministry of Justice says it remains committed to transparency and to providing the public with accurate information. According to the ministry, reporting on matters of public interest should be based on complete facts and a correct presentation of institutional procedures.
