Mayor of Tirana Erion Veliaj asks Special Court to void SPAK probe, cites nine procedural violations

Through his lawyers, Tirana Mayor Erion Veliaj filed a motion dated 13 August asking Albania’s Special Court (GJKKO) to declare the investigation against him invalid. Veliaj, who has been in custody since February, lists nine alleged violations by SPAK in the case where he has been indicted on several counts, including corruption and money laundering.
Why is this important: The filing challenges the integrity of a flagship SPAK case and could affect the timeline toward trial. Veliaj argues investigators breached deadlines, due process, and impartiality standards. The case has already stirred controversy over SPAK’s practices and procedural rigor.
Context: Veliaj claims he was investigated by a prosecutor without the proper status, in a conflict of interest, that SPAK exceeded investigative deadlines, and failed to act to identify an anonymous complainant. In a written submission, he lists the alleged breaches, stating:
“Use of a falsified criminal complaint as the basis for opening the investigation, without any verification of the complainant’s identity; carrying out investigative actions without registering the criminal proceeding, in order to avoid deadlines, judicial oversight and legal limitations; exceeding the investigative time limits by hiding the status of the person under investigation; seizure and use of computer data without a court decision and the reading of private correspondence in the absence of any legal basis and legal authorization.”
The mayor also argues he was not given sufficient time to review the case file; that SPAK used experts dependent on the prosecution; and that the separation of a proceeding was employed “as a tool to undermine the right to defense and legal certainty.”
SPAK indicted Veliaj and his spouse in July and is expected to notify him of the end of investigations on 25 September, a step that would clear the way to send the case to trial.
What’s next: GJKKO will have to examine the defense motion on alleged procedural violations. Any ruling could influence admissibility of evidence or the course of the proceedings, in a case widely watched for its implications on anti-corruption enforcement and defendants’ procedural rights.