SPAK’s twisting investigation into Tirana Mayor stirs debate over motives and methods

The Special Structure Against Corruption and Organized Crime (SPAK) is facing unusual scrutiny over the twists and turns of its investigations into Tirana Mayor Erion Veliaj. What began as a probe into allegations of corruption tied to municipal directors and public procurement has expanded into personal and family-related inquiries, sparking widespread debate about the motives and procedural integrity of the investigation.

Why is this important: Erion Veliaj is one of the most prominent figures in Albania’s ruling Socialist Party (SP). As Mayor of Tirana, his leadership has brought him significant recognition but also considerable adversaries, including within his own party. With parliamentary elections less than five months away, the ongoing allegations and investigations against Veliaj could have a significant impact on the SP, especially given Veliaj’s key role in the Tirana campaign.

Beyond its political ramifications, the case has also placed SPAK under scrutiny about its handling of the Veliaj investigations and their twists and turns. Rumours have circulated for months in Tirana’s coffeehouses, suggesting that the investigation may have been influenced by an alliance between factions within SP with representatives of the opposition. These concerns have now spilled into public debate, especially following the out-of-the-blue emergence of an anonymous accuser whose information to SPAK served to broaden the inquiry into the Mayor’s family. Even some of Veliaj’s critics, have come out to question the prosecutor’s actions, underscoring the risk to the institution’s credibility.

The case now poses significant challenges for both SPAK and the SP. For SPAK, it raises doubts about impartiality and procedural integrity. For the SP, it threatens to undermine one of its key figures and complicate its electoral organization at a key moment.

The expanding investigation: SPAK’s investigation originally focused on governance-related allegations, including the high-profile incinerator project and corruption charges against former municipal directors. Veliaj, who thus far has cooperated fully with SPAK, is not formally accused in either case, both of which are now before the courts.

However, following accusations and information submitted by a mysterious accuser – whose name according to the Mayor does not exist in the Civil Register – the focus of the investigation expanded unexpectedly into Veliaj’s personal and family affairs. The prosecutor and investigators have allegedly looked into such issues as why the Mayor’s mother in law bought clothes that did not correspond to her size or why the Mayors’ late father in law bought and sold a car at a higher price years ago. They have also started to look into the culture foundation led by his wife and the company managed by his brother in an apparent effort to find incriminating evidence.

However, what has caused the greatest controversy is the fact that based on the anonymous denunciation SPAK also questioned Veliaj about a flight he took with a businessman in 2004. Critics point out that in 2004 Veliaj, who had only recently graduated, was a civil society activist and the fact that he was in the same plane as any businessman cannot be relevant to the investigation. But more importantly, questions have been raised about the ability of the anonymous accuser to access detailed aviation records from 2004 when Albania did not yet possess a TIMS border control system, which tracks travel.

Veliaj has described this phase of the investigation as “a politically motivated trap,” arguing that it deviates from legitimate public-interest inquiries into his governance and veers into irrelevant personal matters.

An eight-point rebuttal: Veliaj’s legal team has issued a detailed critique of SPAK’s handling of the investigation. In it, Veliaj’s lawyers highlight eight key procedural concerns:

· Lack of reasonable grounds: The investigation is based on anonymous claims and insufficient evidence to meet the legal standard of reasonable suspicion. Furthermore, the specific crime Veliaj is alleged to have committed remains unclear.

· Undisclosed inquiry: Veliaj and his family were reportedly under investigation as early as March 2024, but this was not disclosed to them. Despite claims that the inquiry focused on “the crime” rather than “the person,” SPAK’s actions suggest a targeted investigation into Veliaj and his relatives.

· Unlawful searches and seizures: Phones and other materials were confiscated without judicial warrants. The confiscations were not tied to specific allegations but appeared to be an effort to uncover incriminating material.

· Witness intimidation: Witnesses were allegedly subjected to coercion and intimidation during questioning, reminiscent of practices from Albania’s communist past.

· Improper witness status: Veliaj and his brother were summoned as witnesses rather than suspects, depriving them of the legal protections afforded to defendants, including access to legal counsel.

· Extended investigation timelines: The legal six-month investigation period appears to have been improperly extended, as Veliaj and his brother became focal points of the inquiry months before their inclusion was formally disclosed.

· Fishing expedition: The inquiry appears to lack a clear focus on specific allegations and instead seems aimed at finding anything incriminating about Veliaj, even unrelated to his official duties.

· Media leaks: Information from the investigation has been constantly leaked to the press, damaging Veliaj’s presumption of innocence and creating public bias against him.

Veliaj’s legal team has framed these issues as evidence of a politically motivated campaign rather than a fair investigation.

Broader implications for SPAK and Albanian politics: The Veliaj case has ignited a broader discussion about SPAK’s role in combating corruption and its vulnerability to political influence. Critics allege that factions within both the opposition Democratic Party (DP) and the ruling Socialist Party (SP) may be leveraging the investigation to undermine Veliaj politically.

Even figures traditionally critical of Veliaj, such as former Justice Minister Ylli Manjani, have expressed concerns about SPAK’s methods, describing them as procedurally irregular and ethically questionable.

The stakes for SPAK and the Socialist Party: For SPAK, the case represents a critical test of its credibility. The institution’s ability to conduct impartial investigations is central to public trust in Albania’s judicial reforms. However, perceived overreach or political bias risks undermining its mission.

For Veliaj and the Socialist Party, the stakes are equally high. The investigation could weaken Veliaj’s standing within the party and complicate its efforts in the upcoming elections.

The case underscores the delicate balance between holding public officials accountable and ensuring investigations remain fair and evidence-based. As the controversy continues, it will test both SPAK’s impartiality and Albania’s commitment to judicial integrity.