The Special Prosecution has formalized a development with major political and criminal significance: Belinda Balluku, former deputy prime minister and former minister of infrastructure, has been formally notified of five charges. According to SPAK’s announcement, the case involves corruption, public tenders, asset declaration, and suspicions of laundering the proceeds of a criminal offense.
SPAK’s announcement and the weight of the case
According to the official version of the Special Prosecution, on October 20, 2026, Balluku was formally notified of the final charges in the framework of this criminal file.
This concerns one of the highest-ranking political figures involved in proceedings of this level, while SPAK’s announcement comes at a time when public attention remains high over how tenders and the assets of senior officials have been administered.
The five charges weighing on Balluku
According to SPAK, Belinda Balluku has been charged with “violation of the equality of participants in public tenders or auctions,” in cooperation, on nine occasions.
The Special Prosecution has also listed the charges of “passive corruption of persons exercising public functions” and “passive corruption of senior state officials or locally elected officials.”
The same announcement also includes the charge of “refusal to declare, failure to declare, concealment, or false declaration of assets,” which according to SPAK was committed twice.
The fifth charge is related to “laundering the proceeds of a criminal offense or criminal activity,” for which SPAK says the case concerns two immovable properties and the qualifying circumstances of commission in cooperation and more than once.
Tenders and assets at the center of the file
The core of the file, according to the official announcement, touches on two areas of high public interest: tender procedures and asset declaration by a senior official.
The fact that SPAK speaks of nine suspected cases of violating equality in tenders makes this part of the case particularly sensitive, as it directly affects how procedures involving public money were managed.
On the other hand, the charges of failure to declare, concealment of assets, and laundering the proceeds of a criminal offense push the case beyond an administrative debate, placing at the center of the criminal investigation the source and handling of assets.
What SPAK says about the continuation of the procedure
The Special Prosecution also announced that it is continuing other procedural actions in order to notify charges to other persons involved in the same criminal case.
Up to this stage, the prosecuting authority has made public only the communication of the charges and the corresponding criminal qualification, without giving further details on the role of each person who may be involved in the file.
The communication of charges does not constitute a finding of guilt, but it marks an important stage in the criminal proceedings against a former senior official.
On the public and institutional level, the file once again raises serious questions about the oversight of tenders, asset declaration, and the real accountability of the highest levels of power.