Prosecutors who have handled organized crime and corruption cases have often failed because they filed incomplete indictments or made procedural errors during the investigation of the cases.

Dr. Arberesha Loxha

Among the essential indicators of democracy are the separation of powers, transparency, accountability, freedom of the media, the guarantee and advancement of human and minority rights and the prevention of corruption, etc.

Kosovo continues to be assessed as being at an early stage in the fight against corruption and organized crime. Despite the initiatives and some specific cases that aim to show efficiency against this phenomenon, the largest number of corruption cases end with acquittals and rejections and only a very low percentage end with convictions. But, even in the cases where the officials involved in corrupt acts are punished, the punishments against them are very low and the same in most cases are not high official profiles. Thus, the conviction has already been created that high official profiles remain unpunished despite the filing of indictments.

Some of the reasons for the failure of indictments in cases where high-profile persons are accused of corruption are: their influence on the judiciary, failure to undertake adequate investigative actions, failure to set court hearings on time, failure of hearings due to the lack of judges, prosecutors , the accused and their defenders, the frequent return of cases for retrial, the prescription of criminal prosecution for the accused, among others. Another factor is the shortcomings of the indictments. The shortcomings are mainly related to the inadequate qualification of the criminal offense, the lack of definition of the injured party and the damage caused, the lack of financial expertise which is directly related to the specification of the damage caused, as well as the lack of a clear description of the factual situation.

All that was said above derives from the lack of adequate supervision over the handling of these cases, by the Judicial Council, the Prosecution Council and the State Prosecutor’s Institution, despite the drafting of strategies aimed at the trial of these cases within a reasonable time.

As a positive effort in the fight against organized crime and corruption, it is worth highlighting two of the largest operations of the Kosovo Police, known as “Subventions” and “Brezovica”, where a large number of public officials are suspected of taking bribes and misuse of official position. Also, the anti-smuggling actions in the north of Kosovo undertaken this year have resulted in a significant number of arrests and seizure of property. In spite of these actions undertaken, the lack of sanctions and the low punitive policy against suspects, as well as the low value of property that is confiscated by court decision, remains challenging. This is mainly due to the lack of effective judicial supervision and the general weakness in the rule of law. Corruption cases continue to be the subject of repeated complaints (appeals) and the judicial system often allows cases to expire without being dealt with by the courts. Also, prosecutors who have handled cases of organized crime and corruption have often failed because they filed incomplete indictments or made procedural errors during the investigation of the cases. Therefore, without adequate addressing of all the shortcomings and challenges mentioned above, progress in the fight against corruption and organized crime will remain minimal.


Dr. Arberesha Loxha is the Executive Director and a Senior Research Fellow at GLPS