CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 18 mars 2025

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 7 April 2025   THIRD SECTION Application no. 7780/20 Gentjan OSMANI against Albania lodged on 31 January 2020 communicated on 18 March 2025 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The case concerns the applicant’s transitional vetting process by the Independent Qualification Commission (IQC) and the Special Appeal Chamber (SAC) (see Xhoxhaj v. Albania , no. 15227/19, 9 February 2021; Besnik Cani v. Albania , no. 37474/20, 4   October 2022; Sevdari v.   Albania , no. 40662/19, 13 December 2022; Nikëhasani v. Albania , no.   58997/18, 13   December 2022; and Thanza v. Albania , no. 41047/19, 4   July   2023). The applicant, an Albanian national born in 1979, served as a prosecutor since 2003, most recently as a prosecutor attached to the Tirana First Instance Court for Serious Crimes. In 2017 he was added to a priority list of persons to be vetted as a candidate to the High Prosecutorial Council. By decision of 2   August 2018 the IQC confirmed him in office. Following the Public Commissioner’s appeal on the recommendation of the International Monitoring Operation, on 31 July 2019 the SAC reversed the IQC’s decision and dismissed the applicant from office, having concluded that in 2011 and   2013 he had had insufficient lawful income to justify 1,760,497 Albanian Lek in assets and expenses as declared for those years. The vetting of the applicant’s spouse Ms O. (N.), a judge at the District Court of Tirana – in which the same negative balance, which resulted from joint expenses and savings declared by the couple, had been identified – ended with her confirmation in office by decisions of the IQC and the SAC, adopted on 11   February 2021 and 27 May 2022 respectively, which relied on the principle of proportionality. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of   Article 8   of the Convention (see, for applicable principles, Xhoxhaj v. Albania , no. 15227/19, §§ 359-413, 9   February 2021)? In particular, was the applicant’s dismissal “necessary in a democratic society” and proportionate   as required by Article   8 § 2 of the Convention, on account of the SAC’s finding that he had had insufficient lawful income to justify 1,760,497 Albanian Lek in expenses and savings in 2011 and 2013 (compare with Xhoxhaj , §§ 402-14, and Sevdari v. Albania , no. 40662/19, §§ 83-97, 13 December 2022)?