Vetting

Excessive use of EC and IMF acts against the government
From the beginning of 2023 to the end of 2025, the Albanian government and various ministers of economy, such as Delinda Ibrahimaj, Ervin Mete and the current minister Petrit Malaj, under the approval of Deputy Prime Minister Balluku, together with the Council of Ministers, would seal 9 normative acts. It should be emphasized that Albania was not in conditions of emergency and need, and this is clear from the weak arguments presented in the reports of the Ministry of Finance.

According to lawyer Adriatik Lapaj, correcting the state budget is a common practice.

"Part of the correction is done due to the changes that occur, but it is certainly not a healthy practice," Lapaj told "Vetting".

Normative Act No. 5, dated 18.10.2023 and Normative Act No. 6, dated 14.12.2023 are two consecutive interventions of the Council of Ministers in the 2023 budget law. Like the 2022 acts, both of these acts were adopted in the last period of the budget year with the aim of redistributing public funds, without changing the level of the deficit or public debt.

In accompanying reports and parliamentary reports, the urgency is argued with the approaching end of the financial year and the need to realize planned expenditures and not under extraordinary circumstances such as economic crisis, natural disaster or risk of administrative blockage.

"If we look at what the normative acts were used for, none or none of the acts presented meet the emergency condition. So, it seems that they were related to certain and dubious needs of the government, but never to resolve a specific situation," said MP Kapri.

According to the SAI report on the implementation of the 2023 State Budget, it is evident that the budget has been amended twice by normative acts and that a significant portion of the annual expenditures was realized in December, precisely after the approval of these acts.

In the same report, the audit emphasizes that the amendment to the budget law with these acts is not accompanied by an exhaustive explanation of the need and urgency that would justify avoiding Parliament.

Both acts have in common the fact that the reserve and contingency funds are being used more than necessary. These funds, which were originally created for unforeseen cases, have been used for expenses that were known in advance to occur.

However, as is evident from the analysis of the accompanying relations, their compatibility with Article 101 of the Constitution remains questionable.

The audit emphasizes that the frequent use of normative acts for budget amendments, especially at the end of the year, has also been noted by international institutions such as the European Commission and the International Monetary Fund, which have recommended limiting this practice.

According to expert Gjokutaj, the audit highlights the problem of improper distribution and expenditures, emphasizing that state budgets in recent years have tended to be clientelistic.

"Budgets are oriented towards certain predetermined sources and of course these also make a difference in the way they are changed", stated expert Gjokutaj, citing the audit report. Suspicions of violations are also found in subsequent acts in 2024, where in normative acts no. 1, no. 3 and no. 5 for the 2024 budget, together with parliamentary reports and reports, many elements emerge that show a repeated pattern of problematic use of the normative act, with strong signs of violation of the budgetary and constitutional legal framework.

All acts have in common the fact that they are formally based on Article 101 of the Constitution, declaring "need and urgency", but nowhere is there a word or sentence that describes the emergency or need.

In all cases, the reason remains the reallocation of funds, improvement of execution or support of social policies, elements that are predictable. This contradicts the standard established by the Constitutional Court, according to which the normative act is an exception and not a planning instrument.

According to the vice-chairman of the "Mundësia" party, Erald Kapri, if there were an emergency, the Albanian government would have taken measures for Oncology, but otherwise it is exploiting the act for dark interests.

"It has only cared about projects that it considered to be in its narrow political interests, as it is no longer about the development interests of Albania, but about interests in how to please a certain group of clients with the government so that they can then help the prime minister to continue in power," declared MP Kapri.

In all reports, a standard, almost identical language is observed, where the same expressions “positive performance”, “expectations by the end of the year”, “need for optimal budget implementation” are repeated. These documents lack alternative analysis and reasons why the Assembly could not convene and lack an assessment of the medium-term consequences. This makes the urgency formal and not real.

Normative act for startups without emergency and need
At the end of April 2025, the Ministry of Economy, Culture and Innovation, as the sole shareholder of the Albanian Investment Corporation under the leadership of Blendi Gonxha, would forward to the Ministry of Finance the project of the artificial intelligence startup “Thinking Machines Lab” where the Albanian state would invest 1 billion lek or no less than 10 million dollars. According to the report, under these conditions, the Ministry of Finance had prepared the first review of the 2025 budget, through normative act no. 3, dated 29.04.2025.

According to MP Kapri, the Albanian government no longer has any limits under the law.

"They have used the law and Parliament as a notary to do everything, despite the fact that everything has been corrupt from beginning to end. Why is this happening, that the government by law decides to give it to a single person, without competition, without anything?" the vice president of "Mundësia" would say about the startup "Thinking Machines Lab".

According to the statement of Minister Petrit Malaj, this project is part of the startup "Thinking Machines Lab" of one of the most successful Albanian-Americans Mira Murati. This is one of the most talked about companies of 2025 in the field of Artificial Intelligence and was founded by Murati, former director of OpenAI, after she left the creators of ChatGPT.

Minister Blendi Gonxhja would present the request as urgent because the deadline to enter the project expired in a few days, at the end of April 2025. Since this investment was not foreseen in the approved budget nor in the medium-term planning, Minister of Finance Petrit Malaj would prepare a solution through normative act no. 3, the first for 2025, after which 3 other acts on the budget would be signed, at the proposal of the Minister of Finance himself.

"The fund was granted to MEKI out of necessity in its capacity as the sole shareholder of the Albanian Investment Corporation to finance the Albanian government's participation in the startup "Thinking Machines Lab" with a value of no more than 10 million dollars and with a payment deadline of April 29, 2025, according to the request sent to us by the Ministry," Minister Malaj would declare on June 5, 2025 in Parliament.

From the statements of the Minister of Finance, but also in relation to the Normative Act, it is not clear what the Ministry's need is that made the proposal.

"I would like to clarify that the urgent implementation of this normative act came mainly from the fact that the project needed to be financed as soon as possible, in order to begin implementation and ensure the necessary benefits," the Minister of Finance would publicly state.

Minister Malaj's speech does not clearly define the two main elements according to the decisions of the Constitutional Court, necessity and urgency.

According to MP Erald Kapri, the Startup case is typical of how the Constitution and the decision of the Constitutional Court have been violated.

"On the one hand, the Constitutional Court, with its 2014 decision, has allowed the Albanian government to intervene with a normative act in the context of an emergency, but how long is this justified when we have a real emergency. If you want to make an investment as a government for a certain element, you can do it very well programmed in the budget, you have no emergency," said MP Kapri, criticizing the government's methods.

The money for the startup was created during 2025, as additional revenue from the administration and disposal of assets seized and confiscated by the state. This revenue is collected by the Agency for the Administration of Seized and Confiscated Assets and then transferred to the budget as non-tax revenue.

According to fiscal expert Eduart Gjokutaj, the specific case of budget allocation, using the Albanian Investment Corporation as a budgetary instrument, entails a deviation from the law.

"This brings about the total disregard of those elements mentioned in the organic budget law, and in general the way in which funds should be directed, avoiding the public procurement law, the law on strategic investments and general budgetary rules," said expert Gjokutaj.

This entire process passes through the Ministry of Finance, which drafts the normative act, determines the source of financing, formulates the justification for “need and urgency” and prepares the accompanying report. At this stage, the Minister of Finance Malaj bears the main legal responsibility for the content of the act, because he is the authority that guarantees compliance with the Constitution, especially with Article 101. If the urgency is not real and the budgetary intervention could have been made by ordinary law, the material responsibility for the misuse of the normative act falls on him.

Subsequently, the act proposed by the Ministry of Finance was submitted for approval by Deputy Prime Minister Balluku, who not only signed it, but also included it in the agenda of the Council of Ministers. At this stage, Deputy Prime Minister Balluku also bears responsibility, because she is the one who decides on the use of Article 101 of the Constitution and guarantees that the normative act is used only in real emergency conditions.

According to the Constitutional Court, "need and urgency" exist only when there is an extraordinary, unforeseen and dangerous situation for the public interest, which cannot wait even for expedited parliamentary procedures and which, if not addressed immediately, brings serious consequences for the state or citizens.

In the case of the normative act for the “Thinking Machines Lab”, the documents show that it is a planned investment, not an unforeseen emergency. There is no risk to the functioning of the state, there is no interruption of public services, there is no legal gap and there is no situation that would prevent the review by the Assembly even with an accelerated procedure. The only reason mentioned is the deadline set by the project itself, i.e. a contractual time limit and not a public risk.

The normative act was to be approved by Parliament, but documents from the Albanian Investment Corporation and the Ministry of Finance reveal a discrepancy between the financial transfers. According to the published act, the Albanian government has approved 1 billion lek, not 10 million dollars. We need to clarify this because 1 billion lek is converted into 11.53 million dollars according to the exchange rate of the Bank of Albania on the day the fund was transferred to the Corporation on April 29, 2025.

On the other hand, according to the decision of the General Assembly of the Corporation, by decision no. 43, dated April 30, 2025, according to the normative act, 867,2 million lek were transferred to it, equal to 10 million dollars according to the exchange rate of the Bank of Albania.

As we mentioned above, officially the Albanian government has transferred 1 billion lek and not 10 million dollars.

Meanwhile, it is unknown where 132 million lek or 1.4 million euros went.

"Vetting" launched a request for comment from "Thinking Machines Lab" to clarify the investments by the Albanian government and how the funds had been spent, but by the time of publication of this material there was no reaction.

"Vetting" made a request for information to the Albanian Investment Corporation about the startup, which company was used to transfer the fund, who the owners are, but until the publication of this material, it did not receive any information.