By Albijona HOXHAJ
Sometimes, speaking up against injustices can cost you your job. Meanwhile, being suspected of abusing it can earn you a promotion.
Ermal Kutllovci, an official at the Ministry of Industry, Entrepreneurship and Trade (MIET), was dismissed from his job after whistleblowing on a suspected scandal involving state reserves. Meanwhile, Irfan Lipovica, who was arrested as a suspect in the same scandal, was rewarded with a higher position.
Kutllovci, the state reserve officer at MIET, had formally objected to the 2022 procurement process of basic goods, warning Minister Rozeta Hajdari in writing that her actions and silence contradicted the primary Law on State Commodity Reserves. He said he never received an official response.
Instead of legal protection as a whistleblower, he was penalized with dismissal on grounds including “disrespecting the hierarchy” and using “demeaning and unprofessional language” toward the minister and other cabinet staff.
But Kutllovci described the decision as a political order imposed by pressure from Minister Rozeta Hajdari.
“Today, the political order of Minister Rozeta Hajdari was fully obeyed by the disciplinary commission, which issued a scandalous decision for dismissal from employment, an arbitrary decision dictated and imposed by unprecedented political pressure,” he wrote.
According to him, the minister tried to silence him during a visit on December 11, 2023.
“My remarks disturbed and greatly angered her, to the point that she completely lost control and demanded revenge in front of everyone,” he publicly stated.
He claimed that Hajdari openly threatened him with disciplinary procedures.
“Minister Rozeta Hajdari, surprisingly, openly threatened me in front of everyone with the words ‘shut your mouth,’ and then ordered Daut Latifaj, the deputy secretary general, to initiate disciplinary proceedings.”
According to Albana Hasani from the Lëvizja FOL, the way Kutllovci was treated sends a discouraging message.
“The way Kutllovci’s report was handled within MIET sends discouraging signals to others who aim to whistleblow in the future. In an environment where whistleblowers are seen as threats and not allies in the fight against corruption, a culture of impunity is fostered, weakening efforts to build a responsible and efficient administration.”
For the state reserve scandal, three people were arrested: officials Haviz Gara and Irfan Lipovica, and businessman Ridvan Muharremi. The case file of the Special Prosecution of the Republic of Kosovo (SPRK) states that not only were illegal procedures discovered, but the goods paid for to Turkish and Polish companies never arrived in Kosovo: 200,000 liters of oil, 120,000 kg of sugar, and 52.5 tons of wheat, worth over 600,000 euros.
Instead of cooperating with justice, MIET Minister Rozeta Hajdari accused the Police of “illegal confiscation” of classified documents and “endangering national security,” defending the arrested officials.
Gzim Shala, a researcher at the Kosovo Law Institute (KLI), says that evidence can only be deemed inadmissible if seized contrary to the law and a court order.
“If that were the case, every minister would classify files to avoid criminal liability. This logic is not followed by Kosovo’s criminal legislation or that of other contemporary states,” he said.
The acting Prime Minister Albin Kurti and government members, including Justice Minister Albulena Haxhiu, openly criticized the Prosecution, publicly interfering in an ongoing investigation.
On April 15, 2024, Hajdari was summoned as a suspect for abuse of office but chose to remain silent during questioning.
The SPRK stated she “exercised her right to remain silent,” though her defense claimed she requested clarifications before responding.
Meanwhile, Prime Minister Kurti was summoned as a witness but did not appear, requesting to be interviewed in his office. The court fined him 250 euros for not responding to the Prosecution’s summons.
Initially, the arrested individuals were given one-month detention, but the Court of Appeals replaced the measure with house arrest. Afterward, Irfan Lipovica, suspected of misusing his position as deputy secretary, was promoted to Director General of Accreditation at MIET.
Shala from KLI says this undermines the logic of fighting corruption.
“The government’s approach demonstrates a negative stance toward anti-corruption efforts. It should have cooperated with the justice system while respecting the presumption of innocence. Instead, the opposite happened.”
According to him, promoting Lipovica and punishing Kutllovci damages institutional integrity.
“This situation sends the message of rewarding suspects and retaliating against whistleblowers.”
Meanwhile, Hasani from FOL states that promoting an official under investigation undermines public trust.
“While Mr. Kutllovci was punished for his courage to report violations, an official suspected of involvement in those violations was rewarded. This creates a worrying precedent, calling into question the integrity and functionality of Kosovo’s civil service.”
Whistleblower Kutllovci appealed his dismissal to the Independent Oversight Board for the Civil Service of Kosovo (IOBCSK). The board partially approved his complaint, reinstating him to his job but replacing the dismissal with a “ban on promotion to a higher category for two years.” Kutllovci has filed a lawsuit against this measure. He did not respond to questions citing ongoing court proceedings, but affirmed his public statements.
The FOL researcher states that if whistleblowers continue to be directly or indirectly punished, as in Kutllovci’s case, the willingness of officials to report future corruption cases will be deeply and negatively affected in the long run.
“Such a situation constitutes an alarming paradox and a profoundly wrong institutional message, fulfilling all the elements of indirect punishment for whistleblowing,” Hasani says.
The Ministry, on the other hand, has not provided an explanation as to why a whistleblower was punished while a suspect was promoted.
The Law on the Protection of Whistleblowers offers whistleblowers protection from harmful actions that may be retaliatory from employers. The law aims to shield those who report specific abuses from retaliation and other harmful actions.
According to the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kosovo, retaliation against whistleblowers is a criminal offense, but the Prosecution has not announced whether it has launched investigations into the retaliation against Kutllovci.
“The case of Ermal Kutllovci meets all the criteria to be treated as a direct violation of the Law on the Protection of Whistleblowers, and there is sufficient legal basis for the Prosecution to initiate institutional retaliation investigations against him,” Hasani states.
Regarding this affair, the Assembly established an Investigative Committee on State Reserves, but the ruling party continuously boycotted it. Transparency International cited this case in its report as evidence of the lack of political will for judicial independence.
“Such comments, which often discredit investigations, directly affect public perception, endanger judicial independence, and make it harder for justice institutions to perform their duties free from political interference,” Hasani concludes.
In this climate, a dangerous reality is emerging in Kosovo: whistleblowing is punished, while suspected abusers are rewarded. And if silence becomes the priority, courage is becoming increasingly costly.
