Former prosecutor Florian Bonjaku, invited to "Studio 24", described the SP report on SPAK's request to lift Belinda Balluku's immunity as problematic.

Bonjaku said that, as Venice has stated, the role of parliament in whether or not to remove the mandate is based on whether or not there is a request and whether there are suspicions of a political annexation or if there is political persecution.

"The PS exceeded what the Venice Council determines, it entered the evidence. They talk about why this measure is needed. The second is about the risk of destroying evidence and the risk of the person leaving or not. All three of these elements are elements that the court analyzes when it comes to the security measure," said former prosecutor Florian Bonjaku.

Florian Bonjaku: The report issued by the SP parliamentary group has several problems. First, it took over the functions of the court.

And in the history of whether or not to remove the mandate and what the Venice Commission has said, it says that the role of parliament in whether or not to remove the mandate is based on whether or not there is a request and whether there are suspicions of a political annexation or if there is political persecution.

The PS exceeded what the Venice Council determines, it entered the evidence. They talk about why this measure is needed. The second one talks about the risk of destroying evidence and the risk of the person leaving or not. All three of these elements are elements that the court analyzes when it comes to the security measure.

Since I worked as a prosecutor, every prosecutor's dream is to be a judge. I think Ulsiu realized a dream of his own because it felt like he was reading a court decision.