State Minister for Relations with Parliament Erjona Ismaili has refused to provide explanations in response to allegations made publicly by former Deputy Prime Minister Arben Ahmetaj about a suspected international arms trafficking scheme. After the government meeting, her reaction did not address the substance of the denunciations, but focused instead on the legal status of the accuser.
The minister’s response, without addressing the allegations
Asked by journalists about the statements and audio materials published by Ahmetaj, Ismaili said she does not wish to respond to the claims of a person who is outside the country and wanted by Albanian justice.
In her statement, the minister called on Ahmetaj to return to Albania and face justice. She used harsh political language, but gave no concrete clarification on the issues raised publicly.
What Ahmetaj claimed in the television interview
The allegations were made by Arben Ahmetaj during an interview on Syri TV on September 7, 2026, where he spoke about a suspected international arms trafficking scheme and published audio materials that, according to his version, are linked to this activity.
At the center of Ahmetaj’s claims were businessman Ron Yefet, the company Timak Defense, and what he called the “KAYO concept.”
Claims of weapons circulation from Africa
According to Ahmetaj, weapons originating from countries in Africa are brought to Albania, packaged, and then sent to other countries.
He claimed that this movement is not connected to Albania’s official agreements with NATO or to supplies for Ukraine, and therefore described it as international arms trafficking. At this stage, the government has not given a direct response to this core allegation.
Questions over public funds and no-bid procedures
Another part of the denunciation concerned the financing of companies operating in the defense industry. According to Ahmetaj, some of them have benefited from public funds through no-bid procedures.
He specifically mentioned Timak Defense, which he claimed received advance payments from the state budget, and raised questions about the capital invested by private shareholders.
On this part of the denunciation as well, the minister’s response offered no clarification on the funds, the procedures, or the institutions that may have authorized the alleged actions.
In the absence of a response to the substance of the allegations, the public debate remains split between the serious claims made by Ahmetaj and the government’s line of treating the issue as an attack by a person on the run.
For now, what has been heard from the government side is more political refusal than institutional clarification on an issue involving weapons, public funds, and the standard of transparency.