CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 17 juin 2025

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 7 July 2025   THIRD SECTION Application no. 17141/21 Ferdinand ELEZI against Albania lodged on 29 March 2021 communicated on 17 June 2025 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The case concerns the applicant’s transitional vetting process by the Independent Qualification Commission (IQC) and the Special Appeal Chamber (SAC) (see Xhoxhaj v. Albania , no. 15227/19, 9 February 2021; Besnik Cani v. Albania , no. 37474/20, 4 October 2022; Sevdari v. Albania , no. 40662/19, 13 December 2022; Nikëhasani v. Albania , no. 58997/18, 13   December 2022; and Thanza v. Albania , no. 41047/19, 4 July 2023). The applicant, an Albanian national born in 1968, served as a prosecutor since 1999, most recently as head of the prosecutor’s office at the Durrës Appeal Court. By IQC’s decision of 9 April 2019, upheld on appeal by the SAC decision of 30 September 2020, the applicant was dismissed from office. The SAC, by a majority vote, concluded that during four years within the 2005 - 2010 period he had had insufficient lawful income to justify a total of 1,084,253 Albanian lek in assets and expenses as declared for those years, notably 120,346 lek in 2005, 709,429 lek in 2007, 118,867 lek in 2008, and 135,611 lek in 2010. In a dissenting opinion, two judges argued that the dismissal was disproportionate in the circumstances.   QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention (see, for applicable principles, Xhoxhaj v. Albania , no. 15227/19, §§ 359-413, 9   February 2021; and Sevdari v. Albania , no. 40662/19, § 85, 13 December 2022)? In particular, was the applicant’s dismissal “necessary in a democratic society” and proportionate as required by Article 8 § 2 of the Convention, on account of the SAC’s finding that he had had insufficient lawful income to justify a total of 1,084,253 Albanian lek in assets and expenses in 2005, 2007, 2008 and 2010 (compare with Xhoxhaj , §§ 402-14, and Sevdari, §§ 83-97)?   What percentage of the applicant’s combined family income for each relevant year did the identified negative balances constitute?