Skip to main content
Corruption cases with social impact in the Western Balkans and Turkey

Former president and prime minister Berisha investigated for changing laws to favour son-in-law’s investment opportunities

Back to Case Index
  • Albania

Former president and prime minister Berisha investigated for changing laws to favour son-in-law’s investment opportunities

Case Date(s)
12/2020
Case Updated
01/2025

Case Summary

Phase

1st instance procedure

Offence

  • Bribery of public officials
  • Abuse of functions
  • Laundering of proceeds of crime

Sector

  • Real estate activities
  • Construction

Institution

  • Prime Minister's Office

Involved people

Allegedly involved people Sali Berisha Former prime minster of Albania, Leader of the Democratic Party
Sali Berisha
Politically exposed
Yes
  • Abuse of functions
  • Passive corruption of high state officials or local elected
Allegedly involved people Jamarbër Malltezi Landowner & shareholder of the company Homeplan
Jamarbër Malltezi
Politically exposed
Yes
  • ​​Laundering of proceeds of crime​
  • Passive corruption of high state officials or local elected
Allegedly involved people Fatmir Bekteshi Constructor, former owner of Homeplan company, owner and CEO of Kontakt company
Fatmir Bekteshi
Politically exposed
No
  • Laundering of proceeds of crime
  • Active corruption of high state officials or local elected
Allegedly involved people Xhim Begeja Majority shareholder of the company Homeplan
Xhim Begeja
Politically exposed
No
  • Money Laundering

SPAK started an investigation against the former prime minister and president of Albania, Sali Berisha and his son-in-law and two others of being complicit in committing corruption and of Berisha favouring his son-in-law on the privatisation of the former sports complex Partizani.

Sali Berisha, a former president (1992–1997) and two-term prime minister (2005–2013), is accused of using his political power to benefit his son-in-law, Jamarbër Malltezi, in the privatisation of the Partizani sports complex. It is alleged that Berisha started the privatisation of the complex after coming to power in 2005 through a government decision to bypass legal restrictions on military property and other laws, such as the amendment to the law governing property restitution. The SPAK investigation claims that Malltezi benefited €5.4 million from construction-related businesses, allegedly due to the influence of his father-in-law’s changes to the law during his time in office to favour Malltezi, leading to significant financial gains.

The case has had several court decisions including a decision from the special court of first instance for corruption and organised crime (GjKKO) where Berisha was accused of passive corruption and laundering of proceeds of crime. GjKKO gave Berisha and his co-accused, businessman Fatmir Bekteshi, the obligation to appear in front of prosecutors and a ban on leaving the country, while Malltezi was initially given a prison sentence.

The constitutional court that GjKKO should revoke the ban on leaving the country but dismissed the appeal to invalidate a house arrest order previously set by GjKKO. In December 2024, GjKKO decided to lift the house arrest measure against Berisha saying that he posed no risk of evidence tampering as the case had been sent to the court. This decision was withdrawn by the GjKKO appeal court on 3 January 2025 with an obligation for him to appear in front of SPAK twice a month. After the decision to impose house arrest, Berisha sent the case to the European Court of Human Rights, which decided on 7 November 2024 (published on 25 November 2024) that this case should have priority consideration, addressing several questions to the Albanian state. The special prosecutor’s office (SPAK) has processed the criminal investigation (no. 287 of 2020) and officially accused Berisha of accepting bribes as passive corruption committed by high-ranking state officials in collusion with others. Berisha and his son-in-law contest this process, stating that it is a political attack by the current prime minister Edi Rama. This is the first case in Albania’s history that involves such high-level political figures. decided that GjKKO should revoke the ban on leaving the country but dismissed the appeal to invalidate a house arrest order previously set by GjKKO. In December 2024, GjKKO decided to lift the house arrest measure against Berisha saying that he posed no risk of evidence tampering as the case had been sent to the court. This decision was withdrawn by the GjKKO appeal court on 3 January 2025 with an obligation for him to appear in front of SPAK twice a month. After the decision to impose house arrest, Berisha sent the case to the European Court of Human Rights, which decided on 7 November 2024 (published on 25 November 2024) that this case should have priority consideration, addressing several questions to the Albanian state. The special prosecutor’s office (SPAK) has processed the criminal investigation (no. 287 of 2020) and officially accused Berisha of accepting bribes as passive corruption committed by high-ranking state officials in collusion with others. Berisha and his son-in-law contest this process, stating that it is a political attack by the current prime minister Edi Rama. This is the first case in Albania’s history that involves such high-level political figures.

Further details

JURISDICTION/COURT

Special court of first instance for corruption and organised crime (GjKKO)

LAWS (ALLEGEDLY) BREACHED

Criminal code, Article 260 – 25 on the criminal action, Passive corruption of high state officials or local elected (complicit)

UNCOVERING METHOD

Based on the denouncement made by the member of the parliament Taulant Balla

JUDGE

Irena Gjoka, Flojera Davidhi, Engert Pëllumbi

DEFENCE COUNSEL

Genc Gjokutaj & Sokol Mëngjesi

SOCIAL HARM ON SDGs

16 Peace, justice and strong institutions

SPAK’s investigation claims that Malltezi benefited by €5.4 million from construction-related businesses, allegedly due to his father-in-law’s influence.

Disclaimer

Every effort has been made to verify the accuracy of the information contained in this database. All information is believed to be correct as of 01/2025. Nevertheless, Transparency International cannot accept responsibility for the consequences of its use for other purposes or in other contexts.

Contribute to this case

Do you have additional information, updates or relevant insights about this case? You can help by sharing new developments or legal updates on the case, providing verified sources that offer more context or evidence or highlighting public reactions or advocacy efforts related to the case.

Do you know of a corruption case that has been reported in the media or by civil society, or is already in the judicial process but is not receiving enough attention? Help us put a spotlight on key corruption cases in your country, and we will review your suggestion and consider adding it to the corruption database.

Please only suggest cases that have already been reported by the media or civil society or cases that are in some stage of the law enforcement or judicial process. If you would like to report a new corruption case, please reach out to our Advocacy and Legal Advice Centres in your country or email us.

Contribute