Outcome 1.2.2
“Prosecution (HPC) governance structure/legislation revised/amended, including but not limited to internal regulations”.
The second outcome that predicts the successful fulfillment of objective 1.2, analyzed above, is that the HPC, after an analysis process, reviews the legislation that regulates its activity, its internal regulations and other acts with generic authority and the HPC structure, which means its internal organization.
First, it is worth noting that, unlike the functioning of the judiciary, the prosecution system provides for a division of powers between the HPC and the Attorney General, where the HPC is only responsible for ensuring the independence, accountability, discipline, status and career of prosecutors of the Republic of Albania, and not for the management or administration and budget of prosecution offices – these responsibilities belong to the General Prosecution Office. So, any analysis related to HPC in this paper will take into account this division of functions, although for certain specific objectives and measures these two bodies contribute simultaneously to the well- functioning of the prosecution system.
By analogy with the outcome set in the case of the HJC, in the case of the HPC, the outcome does not contain the aim of analyzing the legislation, its structure and acts, which is what the objective and purpose of the policy state: the action of the HPC- in accordance with European standards, with professionalism, efficiency, transparency and accountability. In conclusion, any review of the structure, law or internal rules, should aim to meet these principles, so the desired outcome should be a structure and legal basis that guarantees the conditions for the HPC to act professionally and with efficiency and transparency.
The same reasoning applies to HPC as to the real possibility of achieving this outcome. Here we keep in mind that, even in the case of HPC, the delayed establishment of this institution[1], the infrastructural difficulties, which have made it difficult to work efficiently[2], and the beginning only in 2019 to develop the regulatory acts, some of which were only passed towards the end of 2019[3], have allowed a situation where the acts that can be evaluated have been in operation for approximately two years. This is a short time to make a full analysis of their effectiveness or identify a need for improvement. This reasoning is the same as the analysis conducted above in relation to the HJC case.
Conclusion: The projected outcome is in line with the objective; however, it is debatable whether it will serve Policy 1. This is because, both the review of the law governing the HPC and the review of bylaws issued by this body, although likely to be accomplished, the analysis they will produce will be deficient. This is directly related to the insufficient time to produce a complete analysis on the problems that may have been caused by the law or bylaws in the functioning of this body as one of the justice system bodies.
[1]HPC was established per Order no. 1, of 19.12.2018;
[2]HPC has worked in the absence of facilities and has had some offices available, temporarily provided to them by the General Prosecution and the Prosecution at the Tirana Court of Appeals, and only in 2020 moved to suitable working spaces at the Pole of Justice building ” – information taken from the HPC 2019 Annual Report, accessed at: www.klp.al;
[3]Regulation “On the procedure of verification of legal conditions and criteria for recruitment, appointment of magistrates and prosecutors, as well as for the development of prosecutors’ careers”, approved by Decision no. 171, of 27.09.2019, of the High Prosecutorial Council.