The deadlock over the salaries of judges and prosecutors has shifted to SPAK, where a criminal complaint seeks to clarify not only the blocking of payment orders for August 2026, but also the entire institutional chain suspected of ordering or implementing it. At the center of the case are the Ministry of Finance, its secretariat and 16 Treasury branches.
Who was reported and what is suspected
The complaint was filed by 20 authorizing officers of the courts, together with leaders of the judges’ and prosecutors’ associations. They are seeking an investigation into Finance Minister Petrit Malaj, Secretary General Gentian Këri and the heads of 16 Treasury branches.
The complaint cites three alleged criminal offenses: “abuse of office,” “obstruction of the execution of court decisions” and “non-execution of a court decision without justified cause.” The claims remain to be verified by SPAK.
The point of clash: did the Treasury have the right to stop the payments?
According to the complainants’ argument, the Treasury structures had no authority to decide on the legality of the salary formula and, consequently, no authority to block the payment orders. They maintain that, even in the event of disagreement, the administration should have turned to the court rather than unilaterally suspending the payments.
In essence, the issue is presented not simply as a technical dispute over payment procedure, but as a clash between the financial administration and a decision of the Constitutional Court, which the complainants say the institutions were obliged to implement.
The Constitutional Court decision and the salary formula
According to the complaint, after the Constitutional Court’s decision of February 17, 2026 and the expiry of the deadline given to Parliament for legal intervention, the High Judicial Council and the High Prosecutorial Council requested that, from August 1, the base reference salary be calculated according to the formula set out in Constitutional Court decision no. 35/2022 and the parameters of Council of Ministers Decision no. 325/2023.
The complainants argue that failure to apply this formula directly violates a final and binding decision of the Constitutional Court. This is one of the key points SPAK is expected to verify if it opens a full investigation.
Email, electronic traces and the August funds
An important element of the complaint concerns electronic communication between the Ministry of Finance and the Treasury branches. According to the version presented in the complaint, the blocking of the payment orders was followed by an email from the ministry’s secretary general, Gentian Këri, and for this reason the correspondence is requested to be obtained in order to determine who gave the order and on what legal basis.
SPAK is also asked to verify whether the courts had sufficient funds for the salaries for August 2026. According to the complainants, the funds existed, but the payments were not executed. This is precisely where it is expected to be clarified whether the blocking came from a lack of money or from decisions by officials.
14 investigative requests and suspicions of interference
At the end of the complaint, 14 investigative actions are presented for which execution is requested, from obtaining the Constitutional Court decision and the acts of the High Judicial Council and the High Prosecutorial Council, to collecting letters, payment procedures and the full documentation of communications between the Ministry of Finance and the Treasury.
The seizure and examination of electronic traces in the Treasury system is also requested, in order to identify the users who intervened, the actions carried out and the time when they were carried out. Among the points requested to be verified is whether there was political or administrative interference in the non-execution of the payments.
According to the complainants, a magistrate’s salary is not merely a financial issue, but directly affects the guarantees of judicial independence. This places the matter beyond a bureaucratic conflict and raises the question of whether the administration exceeded the limits set by law.
If the claims in the complaint are proven, the matter will not be limited to the delay of several salaries, but to criminal and institutional responsibility for failing to implement a Constitutional Court decision.
For now, it remains for SPAK to assess the requested evidence, the electronic correspondence and the traces in the Treasury system in order to understand where the blocking actually began and who kept it in place.