The administrative hearing for Erion Veliaj was decided to be held behind closed doors. After the live broadcast was interrupted, the hearing has now continued behind closed doors.

Journalist Klodiana Lala told News24 that during his speech, Erion Veliaj said that he demands transparency.

"Honorable judge, I thank you for your words, but this comes after a concern, with the interim decision, I expected there to be transparency, this process has flourished in the dark. The KLP should have protected journalists and protected itself. The KLP has responded to who has been appointed before us, we should all demand transparency, there is a side that wants darkness and a side that wants light", said Erion Veliaj.

Excerpt from Veliaj's statement;

For more than two years, immediately after my election for the third time as Mayor of Tirana, I have been faced with a frontal, disproportionate and unstoppable political, media and legal attack; a clash that, in its conclusion, amounted to the removal of my personal freedom and the inability to exercise the mandate entrusted to me by 160 thousand citizens of Tirana.

Even after formally winning my mandate on the Constitutional Court, after another attempt to abolish it, I continue to be held tenaciously in detention and isolation, while the very legality of the source of that criminal power is today before this court for review.

Every aspect of my life has been scrutinized. Every personal and family dimension of mine has been investigated.

On me and my family, a complete form of “vetting” has been exercised, essentially, not administrative but criminal, 2 outside any normal standard of proportionality. And yet, throughout this time, I have cooperated with justice at every moment. I have contributed to facilitating its work. I have had no hesitation, no shyness and no hesitation in facing the process and the truth, neither yesterday nor today. And this is precisely where the true paradox of this issue begins. Because for more than two years, every possible political, media and legal mechanism was used to bring me to justice, in the most denigrating way possible, for a man who still holds the trust of an entire city for his leadership.

Investigations, wiretaps, checks, public exposure and every other form of exercising criminal power were used, with the argument that I had to face justice. Today, as I stand before justice, with full will to face it, the paradox is that the same mechanism no longer seems to want a real confrontation with justice, but a limited, controlled, quick and procedurally truncated confrontation.

Because it's not just a restriction on my physical freedom that's being sought. It's also a restriction on my ability to effectively defend myself and face challenges with dignity.

I am not allowed to have full and real access to the file. I am not allowed to listen to all the wiretaps carried out against me. I am not allowed to communicate with my international lawyers. I am not allowed to inform the Albanian and international public opinion on the real nature of this 3 issue. Of course, I am not allowed to exercise the mandate that the citizens of Tirana have entrusted to me.

So, while every restriction that can be imposed on a citizen is being imposed on me, at the same time everything is being done to prevent me from effectively exercising those rights that the Constitution of the Republic of Albania itself guarantees me. And every time I try to exercise one of these rights, new procedural obstacles are created, which not only make their exercise increasingly difficult, but are then used against me, to justify further infringements of my personal freedom.

This very trial, where we are today, is another proof of this absurd paradox. Because even today, the opposing party, in essence, does not ask the court to examine my claim on the merits. It asks that the court not enter into the merits of the case at all. It asks that you, Mr. Judge, not examine the legality of the power that was exercised over me and over the institution that I represent. And this is what makes this issue much more serious than a procedural debate.

Because at the core of the claim presented before you lies the idea that I had no right to ask the court to review the legality of the authority that took away my personal freedom; of the authority that put me under surveillance; of the authority that controlled my private life and that of my family members; of the authority that entered every dimension of my personal and institutional life.

So, the government can enter every corner of a citizen's life, but the citizen does not have the right to ask: "By what legitimacy is this power being exercised over me?". So, the government can intervene in the mandate of a mayor even in violation of the limits set by the law itself, but the elected mayor does not have the right to ask: "By what legitimacy is this power being exercised over the municipality and over this city"?

FULL WORD;

Honorable Mr. Judge, For more than fifteen months now, I have been living in a reality that, until recently, I would have considered unimaginable in a democratic republic. A reality where the relationship between the citizen and the criminal power has been gradually inverted, to the point that the very constitutional guarantees seem more and more fragile every day in the face of the uncontrolled force of this state authority.

It is a situation with such a paradoxical charge, that it can only be described more accurately by a pen like Dostoevsky's and not by an ordinary language like mine. For more than two years, immediately after my election for the third time as Mayor of Tirana, I have been faced with a frontal, disproportionate and unstoppable political, media and legal attack; a clash that, in its conclusion, amounted to the removal of my personal freedom and the inability to exercise the mandate entrusted to me by 160 thousand citizens of Tirana.

Even after formally winning my mandate on the Constitutional Court, after another attempt to abolish it, I continue to be held tenaciously in detention and isolation, while the very legality of the source of that criminal power is today before this court for review. Every aspect of my life has been controlled. Every personal and family dimension of me has been investigated. A complete form of “vetting” has been exercised over me and my family, not administrative but criminal, 1 outside any normal standard of proportionality. And yet, throughout this time, I have cooperated with justice at every moment. I have contributed to facilitating its work.

I have had no hesitation, no shyness and no hesitation in facing the process and the truth, neither yesterday nor today. And this is where the real paradox of this issue begins. Because for more than two years, every possible political, media and legal mechanism was used to bring me to justice, in the most denigrating way possible, for a man who still holds the trust of an entire city for his leadership. Investigations, wiretaps, checks, public exposure and every other form of exercising criminal power were used, with the argument that I had to face justice. Today, when I find myself before justice, with full will to face it, the paradox is that the same mechanism seems to no longer want a real confrontation with justice, but a limited, controlled, quick and procedurally truncated confrontation. Because not only is the limitation of my physical freedom required. It is also required to limit my ability to effectively defend myself and face it with dignity. I am not allowed to have full and real access to the file.

I am not allowed to listen to all the wiretaps carried out against me. I am not allowed to communicate with my international lawyers. I am not allowed to inform the Albanian and international public opinion on the real nature of these 2 issues. Of course, I am not allowed to exercise the mandate that the citizens of Tirana have entrusted to me. So, while every restriction that can be exercised on a citizen is exercised on me, at the same time everything is done so that I cannot effectively exercise those rights that the Constitution of the Republic of Albania itself guarantees me. And every time I try to exercise one of these rights, new procedural obstacles are created, which not only make their exercise increasingly difficult, but are then used against me, to justify further infringements of my personal freedom.

This very trial, where we are today, is another proof of this absurd paradox. Because even today, the opposing party, in essence, does not ask the court to examine my claim on the merits. It asks that the court not enter into the merits of the case at all. It asks that you, Mr. Judge, not examine the legality of the power that was exercised over me and over the institution that I represent. And this is what makes this issue much more serious than a procedural debate.

Because at the core of the claim presented before you lies the idea that I did not have the right to ask the court to review the legality of the authority that took away my personal freedom; of the authority that put me under surveillance; that controlled my private life and that of my family members; of the authority that entered every dimension of my personal and institutional life. So, the government can enter every corner of a citizen's life, but the citizen does not have the right to ask: "With what legitimacy is this power being exercised over me?" So, the government can intervene in the mandate of a mayor even in violation of the limits set by the law itself, but the elected mayor does not have the right to ask: "With what legitimacy is this power being exercised over the municipality and over this city"? And this is precisely where the greatest absurdity of this matter lies. I have filed a lawsuit before you. A lawsuit that is nothing more than the exercise of a right that humanity has known since the dawn of civilization; from the codes of Hammurabi to the Kanun of Lekë Dukagjini: the human right to seek an impartial trial and to seek justice.

They don't want to allow me to do this either. Both the defendant Dado and the KLP itself, the authority that should have guaranteed the legality of the exercise of this public function, today claim that I am not legitimate to address the court to request control of this authority. Because according to this logic, a citizen can be investigated, monitored, arrested, isolated and controlled in every aspect of his personal, family and public life; a mayor 4 can be suspended from exercising the mandate given by the citizens; citizens can have the mayor elected by them removed from office, but the moment they address the court to request verification of the legality of the authority that exercises this power, then he is no longer considered a subject of protection by the law, but a threat to justice itself.

So, the citizen can give justice the sword of power to act in his name, but he has no right to ask who is holding that sword, with what legitimacy he holds it, and in whose name he is using it against him. Benjamin Cardozo, one of the most enlightened figures of the American Supreme Court, warned that justice loses its meaning the moment procedural guarantees are reduced to the point that the citizen remains defenseless against power. And it is here that the essential question of this issue arises.

Who can be more legitimate to demand control of the legality of this authority than the citizen himself, whose freedoms and fundamental rights have been directly violated by its exercise? Who can be more legitimate than an individual whose personal freedom has been taken away, whose private life has been controlled, whose exercise of a public mandate has been interrupted, and against whom the most intensive form of the criminal power of the state has been exercised?

And likewise, who can be more legitimized than the Municipality of Tirana itself, an institution whose normal exercise of the elected mayor's mandate was interrupted, as a direct consequence of the exercise of this authority? Because in the end, the question becomes even simpler than all this proceduralism tries to present: What more needs to happen to a citizen and a democratic institution, for them to have the right to request from the court verification of the legality of the power that has been exercised over them.

Or should the citizen remain silent at all? Should he accept any interference with his life, freedom and dignity, without having the right to ask the court to control the legality of the authority that exercises this power over him? Because if this is the logic that is accepted, then we no longer have a state of law. Then we have a criminal power that seeks to remain out of control. This uncontrolled power is not justice. It is arbitrariness. Therefore, Honorable Judge, at the core of this whole issue lies a question that is as simple as it is decisive.

Is Olsi Dado a prosecutor of the Republic of Albania? Has he been given, constitutionally, the authority to exercise criminal power on behalf of the Republic of Albania? 6 This is the question that today requires an answer from you, Honorable Judge. Not only for me. Not only for this city. But for our Republic. Well, I am here today not only to defend the rights that emanate from me as a citizen from the sovereignty of the Albanian people and that are inscribed in the Constitution of the Republic, but to defend the very principle that in the Republic of Albania no one who exercises criminal authority over a citizen can remain above the control of the law.

Because the day a citizen loses the right to seek judicial control over the authority that has violated his freedom, that day not only the fate of an individual is put into question. That is the day when the very republican idea that the law prevails over power begins to be put into question. And the moment this idea collapses… the Republic itself collapses.