Four days before he was brutally killed in Vitomirica in Pec, Arlinda Zekiaj had called for urgent intervention of justice institutions, raising claims of the officials responsible for handling her cases.
The Constitutional Prosecutor in Pec has come up with an official clarification on October 26th 2026, confirming that on October 22nd he had accepted a parapet from the victim, through which the action company was required to officials of the responsible institutions.
According to the prosecution, Arlinda had filed claims not to fulfill official duties during handling her cases, including the issue of executing a court ruling.
The prosecution ordered treatment of parliament for allegations of misuse of official duty
In its communiqué, the Constitutional Prosecutor in Pec suggests that after accepting and examining the parachute, the chief prosecutor had ordered her registration for treatment by the competent prosecutor.
The goal was to assess the victim’s claims in terms of criminal responsibility, namely in the direction of criminal acts. Use of official position or authority.
This confirms that Arlinda’s claims of actions and actions of officials were submitted to the Prosecutor prior to her murder.
However, it is not known by the communiqué whether any concrete investigative action was taken by officials mentioned in the parliament.
The prefix was conveyed to police, judges, and social institutions
The prosecution has announced that Arlinda’s parade was forwarded for urgent treatment to several other institutions.
Among them were the Regional Police Directorate in Pec, the Foundation Court in Pec, the Directorate for Social Goods, and the Centre for Social Work.
From these institutions it was required to examine the victim’s claims and verify the eventual concessions or actions of responsible officials within their institutional competencies.
Arlinda also called for the execution of a court decision to exploit the home
Another important element discovered by the Prosecution relates to a judicial decision involving equal exploitation of the home.
According to the communiqué, the victim had called for the execution of this decision, while the prosecution claims its implementation had been enabled by the caretaker prosecutor, in co-operation with the Kosovo Police.
However, the communique gives no details of when this action has been carried out and under what circumstances the decision has been carried out.
From request for protection in the cruel murder of Arlinda’s last four days
The case takes on even heavier proportions for the fact that Arlinda Zekij was killed on Sunday evening, October 25th, in Vitomirica of Pec.
According to information reported by the Signal newspaper, the suspect in the murder is her brother – in – law, Albert Sylaj, who allegedly hit the victim with an axe.
The signal reported that the victim had denounced domestic violence and had returned home from a police patrol minutes before it was found without signs of life.
The lawyer who had represented the victim in domestic violence cases, Adelina Hoxha Shabani, had claimed the signal that Arlinda had expressed fears that he could be killed.
I know they’re gonna kill me. They’re gonna kill me.It was a statement that, according to the lawyer, the victim had told her before the tragedy.
Arlinda’s murder has raised serious questions about the responsible institutions’ response and measures that were taken for its security.
The prosecution promises serious treatment of claims
At the end of the communiqué, the Constitutional Prosecutor in Pec has stressed that the circumstances of the case, the claims presented in the victim’s parliament, and the actions of institutions will be dealt with with seriously and professionally.
The prosecution has also expressed condolences to the victim’s family.
However, some institutional clarifications still remain: what concrete actions were taken after the October 22nd parade, when responsible institutions were announced, and whether any risk assessment of the victim’s life had been made.
Four days after her request for institutional intervention, Arlinda was no longer alive.
The case already raises the question of whether institutions had taken all necessary measures to protect it, questions that require answers from competent authorities.
Note: Those who are referred to in this article are represented innocent until their guilt is proved by court – form decision.
The signal where the truth speaks before the news!
/Gazeta Sinjali/
Source Layer: Signal