Tirana Municipal Council vs SPAK: Veliaj's attendance, budget and who runs City Hall (Aug–Sep 2026)

• Council request (29 Sep 2026): Veliaj attends in person or by videoconference; sent to SPAK and General Directorate of Prisons (Boldnews, 29 Sep 2026).
• SPAK refused the request; the decision reportedly relied on Law no. 81/2020 (Boldnews, as reported; SPAK statement not quoted).
• Constitutional Court decision no. 66 of 3 Nov 2025 is cited by the council as the basis for attendance rights (Boldnews).
• Anuela Ristani had run City Hall since February 2025 (dataset: anuela-ristani; secondary report).
• Late August 2026: Veliaj withdrew Ristani's delegated powers (secondary report; not verified in full text).

Four lists kept apart on purpose: what is established, what is only alleged, what is still open, and what those concerned said.

Possible explanations that connect this record with other findings. They are not findings; each lists the evidence for and against.

• Source label: Unverified

  Repeated acting-mayor changes in Tirana may reflect Veliaj's attempt to keep control from detention, rather than normal administration

  While in pretrial detention, Veliaj reportedly dismissed and then reversed the dismissal of acting mayor Anuela Ristani, and Rama reportedly demanded the removal of the whole leadership. The pattern could show a power struggle inside the municipality or a political push to remove an ally.

  Evidence for

  • Reports say Veliaj dismissed Ristani from the acting-mayor role at least twice in 2026 (Balkanweb; date from a secondary report).
  • A2 reports that Rama demanded the removal of the deputy mayors, including Ristani.

  Evidence against

  • Reports say Veliaj withdrew at least one dismissal, which could be an administrative correction rather than a pattern.
  • The sources conflict on who currently leads the municipality, so the timeline is not established.
• Source label: Unverified

  Procedural squeeze: boycotts, secret transfer orders and attendance refusals may be shaping the trial and the council rather than the merits

  Within a short period the case shows several procedural frictions at once: lawyers boycott hearings and are fined; the court relabels the boycott as a reason to suspend detention terms; the prison authority classifies a transfer order as a state secret; SPAK refuses the council's request for the mayor to attend; and the City Hall powers dispute runs for months. Taken together, these could mean that procedural conflict (over files, live broadcast, representation and detention terms) is slowing a trial whose outcome is still open, while the mayor's office stays partly vacant.

  Evidence for

  • 6 Oct 2026: hearing postponed and lawyers fined 50,000 lek each; defence says it lacks 24 volumes and digital evidence (Shteg; ADN; Top Channel headline).
  • 29 Oct 2026: prison directorate says the transfer order is a state secret (ADN).
  • 29 Sep 2026: SPAK refused the council's attendance request (Boldnews).
  • CoE Congress report (14 Oct 2026) says Veliaj 'is unable to perform his mayoral duties' while in detention (ADN summary).

  Evidence against

  • The Supreme Court upheld detention on 15 Sep 2026 and the CoE rapporteurs say they do not comment on criminal proceedings (ADN summary); the courts, not SPAK alone, decided custody.
  • The directorate says the order was signed under standard procedures and in full compliance with the legal framework; its stated security reasons are not named, so the secrecy claim is unexplained rather than proven improper.
  • Lawyers' boycotts and fines are the defence side's choice in a dispute about regulations; the court has the right to set procedure.
  • Veliaj's own side has pushed for live broadcast and representation by a single lawyer, which the court rejected; delay is not one-sided evidence.