Vetting show
The National Territorial Council violated the local government law, gave away land without the permission of the Municipality
On July 23, 2025, the National Territorial Council would hold its next meeting to approve permits for towers and resorts related to its competences. At this meeting, the construction permit approved on the same date for the former company of Tax Director Erilinda Lala, which is suspected to be owned by her husband Taulant Godroli, would stand out.
According to the project, the construction permit was to be issued for the object "Residential, service and hotel building 3, 8, 10, 12 and 15 floors above ground, with 2 floors of underground parking", located in Qerret and with the developer company "2D Construction 2025".
Documents obtained by "Vetting" show that the construction permit from the National Territorial Council was granted before the nature of the land was determined, i.e. land for development and construction.
But what is the violation?
In such procedures, before the National Territorial Council approves such a construction permit, this land had to be approved once as a Decision by the Municipal Council. According to official documents, the procedures did not follow the law, but the request for the quick approval of this construction permit. “Vetting” made a request for information to the Territorial Development Agency about this decision, which even though it has been more than 6 months since it was taken, has not been disclosed by the ARD.
The editorial team has filed a complaint against the institution and the request is currently registered with the Commissioner for the Right to Information and Personal Data Protection, Besnik Dervishi, as the AZT refuses to provide the transparency that is required by law.
Initially, the company that will develop the project, "2D Construction 2025", has submitted a request for the development of the tourist project in Qerret.
Following this request, the Municipality of Kavaja prepares a draft decision for the Municipal Council on the use of a part of the public land in Qerret. In this document, the municipality expresses “consent in principle” for this land to be developed by the investor. The term “consent in principle” in administrative practice means that the municipality has not yet approved a concrete agreement, but gives a preliminary approval for the project to proceed with other procedures. In practice, this term does not exist in Albanian law as it is an invention of the public administration. This term is not found in any law or in the Constitution, but legal procedures are followed to proceed with the approval of the status of the land.
According to lawyer Kola, this term does not exist in jurisprudence.
"For so many years that I have been practicing law and practicing jurisprudence and knowing the law, there is no term that says 'consent in principle'. Consent in principle is coffee chat. We both sit down and I say, look, I agree in principle with what you are saying, BUT", the sentence always continues with a 'but', said lawyer Kola, expressing surprise at the term.
After the term “in principle consent” from the Municipality of Kavaja, this draft decision is then voted on by the Municipal Council of Kavaja. By voting on this decision, the Municipal Council authorizes the municipal administration to continue the procedures for land development and gives the right to the mayor to negotiate and conclude an agreement with the investor. This is the moment when the municipality gives legal approval to the project.
At the same time, the project is sent for review at the central level to the National Territorial Council, but the Territorial Development Agency cannot issue a decision on a construction permit without the decision on the land permit being approved by the Kavaja Municipal Council. At the meeting of July 23, 2025, the granting of a construction permit for the facility in Qerret was approved.
From this chronology emerges an element that highlights the circumvention of local government and the law itself. In legal practice, the legal relationship over the land is first regulated and then the construction permit is requested. In this case, from the documents it appears that the construction permit was approved by the KKT before the final contract was signed between the municipality and the investor. Initially, the project is issued with a construction permit by the KKT on July 23, 2025, then the company writes to the Municipality of Kavaja that it has been provided with this permit and requests the continuation of the procedures in the Municipal Council for property no. 117.
Only after this comes Decision No. 45 of the Municipal Council on October 20, 2025 on the granting of public property for development, then comes the verification of the Prefect and the authorization of the mayor to sign the contract and finally the enterprise contract is concluded. So the normal order of legal procedures has been reversed. Instead of the company first securing the right to the public property and then obtaining the construction permit, the documents show the opposite, so the permit came first and the right to the property was formalized later.
The question becomes very simple, on what legal title was the construction permit granted?
According to lawyer Margarita Kola, in cases where building permits are issued, the land on which construction will be carried out must first be in the legal regime of the plot.
"You cannot issue a building permit for land that may have a legal regime, it may be agricultural land or forest, pasture. There is a certain legal regime.
"The legal regime of the land could have been changed with a decision of the municipal council, but this had to be done once, so it was a prerequisite. Then, in order to grant the construction permit, this decision had to be made once, for the land to be a plot of land, then the construction permit would have to be granted," said lawyer Kola.
The lawyer continues to add that the order of actions has been changed, being completely the opposite.
At the same time, compliance with the General Local Plan of the Municipality of Kavaja, which was reviewed and approved by the KKT in 2023 and determines the urban development parameters for the territory of the municipality, must also be considered.
In the General Local Plan, up to 6 floors of construction are allowed for this area, while the project has 15 floors, raising the hypothesis that this project may have special status.
The project is much higher than the basic parameters of the G2-A42-01 unit. From the review of the PPV of
Kavaja Municipality, for this unit, parameters result that increase the reference height to 6 floors, while the intensity and coefficients increase, but not in a way that can explain a 15-story tower by itself.
“Vetting” requested a comment from the Municipality of Kavaja regarding the decision of the Kavaja Municipal Council that was taken after the construction permit was granted for the land under the administration of the municipality. Until the publication of this material, the institution did not make any comment regarding this issue.
A serious problem is the status of property no. 117 itself. In the decision of the Kavaja Municipal Council, it is presented as a property of the “fruitless” type, but from the cadastral documents and the report it appears that the property has notes as “road + canal”. This means that public property is not simply an empty plot of land on the coast, but a property where it turns out that there is a public infrastructure function, for which approvals from other institutions are also needed.
The important problem is that the company itself writes to the municipality after it has received the construction permit, requesting the continuation of the procedures for the public property. This letter in itself is very significant because it shows that the entity itself admits that, although it has the permit in hand, the procedures with the municipality for the land have not yet been closed.
Another problem is the lack of tax payment, according to the official response of the Kavaja Municipality.
The municipality says that no payment has been made to it by the company. This does not automatically mean that the permit is null, but it does mean that the project, at least according to the documents you have, is not consolidated financially towards the municipality. So we have a project with a permit, with a subsequent contract, but without any payment recorded with the municipality.
But the most important question is this, where will the company find the revenue for the infrastructure tax, which amounts to about 1 million euros?
“Vetting” made a request for comment to the Director of the Territorial Development Agency, Adelajda Roka, who has the role of Technical Secretariat, regarding the fact that the construction permit was granted without passing the decision on the land to the Kavaja Municipal Council, which was in violation of the law. The request also included questions about how a permit for a 15-story building was granted, when for the land where the company applied, the General Local Plan of the Kavaja Municipality provides for buildings up to 6 floors.
Until the publication of this article, Director Roka did not provide any clarification on the specific case, to explain how this decision was made.
