The third session of the ‘Constitutional’ starts for the dismissal of President Meta / Dervishaj: I have brought new evidence and facts

At the same time when the lawyers of the head of state will be before the constitutional judges, a few meters further from Ilir Meta from his office will publicly read the answers to the 72 questions asked by the members of the court.

The president has chosen not to physically participate in the ongoing trial against him, leaving the defense to lawyers.

Today, with the start of the session, the representative of the President Bledar Dervishaj said that he has brought new evidence and facts for the trial panel.

Dervishaj has submitted a new request to the court. The assembly documents were distributed to members of the trial panel and a copy was sent to the president.

Dervishaj: We also have the materials in flash and we will use the certified court laptop.

Bushka: We want to understand what this request is about, whether it is about answering questions, or something else.

Tusha: We can make the court laptop available to you depending on the process.

Dervishaj: I got the working laptop and it would help me to explain, I brought new evidence and facts.

Dervishaj: We are in the third session of this issue. The presidency presented its answers. The Assembly also submitted them in writing. Did not respond within 2 hours. That was impossible. We have drafted the answers in writing. I file before the court the written answers of the president. Focusing on some new evidence that has come from the Assembly and the president. I want to anathema the truth of the evidence from the Assembly, it came on Friday urgently, while we were working on the questions. It is done to refute the claims of the president. This is urgency, we understand. But the assembly can not interfere with the evidence, its authenticity.

On February 4, the Court sent us a letter from the Assembly. Since July 1, we have referred to the number of the chairman 06.05.2021 and not 05.05.2021 as forwarded by the Assembly. It is in the format with the signature of the chairman.

The 7th date for the meeting of the Assembly could not be set because the report had not been formed.

If we compare item 20 of the chairman’s order with item 20 of the agenda, the title also changes.

This casts strong doubt on the veracity of the evidence brought. The biggest mistake is the urgency of how this test of the Assembly was brought, which is not true, but aims to refute what the president claims.

President’s interference in the election. The president communicated in writing with the state commissioner, requesting that the entire president’s cabinet participate in election observation.

Celibashi informed the president that he and his cabinet could take part in election observation. Therefore the president’s intervention in overseeing the laws was legitimate.

Vijon…