A case that began with an international operation against mine trafficking and ended with an acquittal for money laundering in Albania raises serious questions about the way in which judicial proceedings intersect, or do not intersect, between states.
Ο Ylli Seferi, γνωστός στις ιταλικές αρχές με το προσωνύμιο «Daja», καταδικάστηκε οριστικά το 2021 στην Ιταλία σε κάθειρξη 11 ετών και 10 μηνών για συμμετοχή σε οργανωμένο κύκλωμα διακίνησης ναρκωτικών. Σύμφωνα με τις ιταλικές αποφάσεις, το δίκτυο, στο οποίο συμμετείχαν συγγενικά του πρόσωπα και συνεργάτες μαροκινής καταγωγής, διακινούσε επί χρόνια μεγάλες ποσότητες χασίς και κοκαΐνης σε Ιταλία, Ισπανία και Ολλανδία. Το Ανώτατο Δικαστήριο της Ιταλίας απέρριψε τις αιτιάσεις της υπεράσπισης, κρίνοντας ότι η οικογενειακή σύνδεση των μελών όχι μόνο δεν αναιρούσε τη συγκρότηση εγκληματικής οργάνωσης, αλλά ενίσχυε τη συνοχή και την αποτελεσματικότητά της.
At the same time, a separate money laundering case was opened in Albania. The starting point was banking transactions in early 2018, specifically the attempted transfer of 250,000 euros to an account in the Netherlands that was blocked by a bank and the subsequent withdrawal of almost the same amount in cash. Authorities recorded a total movement of amounts exceeding one million euros, including company loans.
The Tirana Court of First instance, In february 2023, found the evidence sufficient and sentenced ylli seferi, his wife and Son To five years in prison in absentia. The reasoning was based mainly on banking transactions and the assessment that the defendants were aware of criminal investigations against them abroad.
However, in 2025, the Court of Appeals completely overturned the decision. The appellants ruled that the basic criminal act that would establish the offense of money laundering had not been sufficiently proven, nor had the required knowledge and intent been established. On this basis, the defendants were acquitted.
Of particular importance is the fact that the Italian conviction had become final years before the appeals court crisis in Albania. However, according to information obtained from a journalistic investigation, the relevant final decision was not fully incorporated into the case file, a fact that proved decisive for the development of the case.
The two levels of the prosecution appeared with a different approach. The prosecutor of the first trial argued that the evidence was sufficient and that the criminal activity had been proven. The Court of Appeal pointed out that the court is bound exclusively by the content of the file and cannot make up for deficiencies in the pre-investigation procedure.
The case highlights the difficulties of financial investigations in an environment where assets can be transferred or appear in the names of third parties. At the same time, it raises a broader question about the coordination of judicial authorities when a final conviction for drug trafficking in one state is not sufficient to support a money laundering charge in another.
