According to announcements made in the media on 26.07.2025, the family members of citizen B.K., through an open letter, launched an appeal for the investigation of the loss of his life in the premises of pre-trial detention facility “Jordan Misja”. Based on this announcement, AHC conducted a monitoring visit on 29.07.2025 at the premises of IEPD “Jordan Misja”, in order to verify the issues raised by the family members of the deceased.
Citizen B.K. was accommodated at IEPD “Jordan Misja” on 16.07.2025 and, from the moment of admission into the institution, had stated that he was treated for complex diagnoses, such as: Diabet Mellitus type 2, under insulin, HTA phase IIII, Dyslipidemia. He also stated that six months earlier, he had undergone AVC acute ischemia.
It results that during the first days of his accommodation (according to notes in the Medical Report Card of 18.07.2025), citizen B.K. had made complaints about headaches, body weakness, and burning. Based on the review of documentation, it resulted that such complaints were continued. Therefore, on 21.07.2025, citizen B.K. had been transferred from Building A where he had been until that moment to Building B of the institution, due to better accommodation conditions that it provides.
The detainee had initially been placed in room no. 2, together with three other citizens, but due to his condition and the complaints he made, he was transferred again, this time to room no. 6, where he was by himself. His poor health condition appears to have been evident also for police officers in the sector as for 22.07.2025, the Shift Transfer Book featured a note by Police Specialist G.R.: Keep under continued observation detainee of room no. 6, floor -1, sector 2, B.K. and inform the information specialist on every concern. Nevertheless, from AHC verifications, it results that there were no documented notes on steps taken to keep citizen B.K. under observation. This may only come out from a careful verification of security cameras installed in the corridor where the room that the detainee had been accommodated in was located.
In the evening of 23.07.2025, the 24-hour Activity Book contained notes that at 20:45, detainee B.K. was not feeling well. At 21:00 and 22:05, the doctor had gone to his room to measure his blood pressure. It results that from this moment, for about 9 hours until the next morning when he was found unconscious, there is no note that documents further updates on his health condition by the police personnel or the health care personnel.
The first shift employees, at 7:00 of 24.07.2025, had found that citizen B.K., accommodated in room no. 6, did not react when they spoke to him. They had notified immediately the responsible officer and the doctor, who had entered the room at 07:03. At 07:05, the man had been accompanied to the TUHC emergency ward and the emergency doctor had concluded that pre-trial detainee B.K. had suffered Exitus letatis (death) due to: Suspected Cardiac Arrest.
Based on the above monitoring, it results that the citizen remained accommodated in IEPD “Jordan Misja” for about eight days, but in spite of his repeated complaints to be sent to hospital, this was not done because, according to findings of the medial personnel, his parameters were normal and had recommended conducting further lab exams on him. Nevertheless, AHC raises questions about the fact that the complex diagnosis of this citizen and his continued suffering, confirmed by detainees who shared the room with him, required a fast reaction for his examination and specialized treatment, immediately after his admission into the IEPD.
AHC notes that examination and continued monitoring of the health condition of citizens accommodated in the premises of institutions of deprivation of liberty, is an obligation arising also from articles 15 and 20 of the General Regulations of Prisons, precisely for preventing cases of loss of life or suicide. The health care service should be ensured for 24 hours and in cases of illnesses, which may not be diagnosed or cured in these institutions, the imprisoned citizens are entitled to be transferred to the Prison Hospital Center or the Tirana University Hospital Center. Referring to provisions of article 41 of law no. 81/2020, medical personnel of the IEPDs has the duty to highlight and immediately notify about illnesses that require specialized treatment.
In this regard, it is worth mentioning also the standards elaborated in Strasbourg Court caselaw, which although noting that “adequacy” of medical assistance remains the most difficult element to be determined in the prison system, it is guided by the proper care test, keeping in mind the tools that the state pursued and not the result. According to article 3 of the Convention (ECHR), it is stipulated whether relevant domestic authorities took all reasonable possible medical measures at the right time in a “deliberate attempt to obstruct the development of the illness in question (Goginashvili vs. Georgia, 2011, § 71). The very fact that a detainee is visited by a doctor and is ascribed a certain form of treatment may not automatically lead to the conclusion that the medical assistance was adequate (Hummatov vs. Azerbaijan, 2007, § 116). Authorities should also ensure when necessary due to the nature of a health condition that monitoring is regular and systematic and includes an inclusive therapeutical strategy that aims at the adequate treatment of health problems of the detainee or the prevention of their worsening, instead of addressing them in a symptomatic manner (Amirov vs. Russia, 2014, § 93).
AHC calls for further objective and comprehensive verifications by the Ministry of Justice and the General Directory of Prisons, regarding the incident, to identify responsibilities in the case and prevent other similar instances in the future.
In closing, AHC notes with profound concern that the penal policy pursued by our justice system with regard to the excessive application of the security measure of “arrest in prison” remains problematic. It is not the first time that citizens with serious health problems who do not pose any marked social risk or the risk of the penal offense they are investigated for, lose their life in the pre-trial detention system. This policy is not in accordance with international standards that strongly encourage that coercive measures of restriction of liberty not be used during investigations, especially considering, in the case in question, the medical background of citizen B.K.
