The Kosovo Law Institute (KLI) published a parliamentary research report on Thursday, presenting six amendments to the bill governing the State Bureau for the Verification and Confiscation of Unjustified Assets.
Të lidhura
None found
The document, titled “Necessary changes before the final adoption of the Law on the Bureau,” addresses issues that the institute says must be improved before the Assembly gives the bill its final approval.
Gzim Shala, a senior researcher at KLI, said the report was prepared for the period between the two parliamentary readings and contains concrete proposals for changes to the law.
Among the institute’s demands is that the Bureau’s director general and the members of the Oversight Commission elected by the Assembly must secure at least 61 votes. According to KLI, this requirement would strengthen the institution’s independence.
KLI also calls for the establishment of a Civil Confiscation Division within the Court of Appeals, so that judicial specialization covers both levels of adjudication.
One amendment proposes that extending asset verification beyond the end of a person’s tenure in public office should be based on a measurable criterion. Verification could extend for up to five years after the person leaves office when the difference between assets acquired and lawful income over the same period exceeds 25,000 euros.
The report proposes that the Court first examine whether the confiscation application has merit. The burden of proof would shift to the party only after the Court approves the application through a final ruling. An appeal against the confirmation ruling should also have suspensive effect.
Another proposal calls for rules on compensation for damages in cases where proceedings end without confiscation. These include damages arising from restrictions on the use or disposal of assets, a decline in their value and the direct costs of the proceedings.
The sixth amendment would allow third parties to challenge decisions to extend asset verification in Court.
KLI considers the establishment of a mechanism for verifying and confiscating unjustified assets legitimate, but stresses that the law must be clear and predictable and provide sufficient procedural safeguards.
