The crash for Vlora Airport has taken another turn. Following the National Business Centre’s decision to cancel the census of 47% of quotas, Valon Ademi’s 2A Group has reacted strongly, rejecting reports that Behgjet Pacolli has returned ownership of over 98% of the airport. The company emphasises that an administrative decision on changing trade extracts does not annul the business business contract and insists that it remains legal owner of 49% of the concession society quotas.
Signal newspaper brings the position of 2A Group regarding recent developments for ownership of Vlora International Airport society ( VIA, following the UN decision of October 26, 2026.
The decision has prompted reports that Behgjet Pacolli’s MABCO company has returned 98% of the quotas, following the cancellation of their 47% transfer to 2A Group.
However, Valon Ademi’s company opposes this development being presented as the final solution to the property dispute.
The RH2A Group has been, is and remains a partner with 49% at Vlora Airport, the company’s response reported.
QB cancelled registration, not trading contract
At the centre of the response is a legal distinction that, according to the 2A Group, has been overshadowed by reports on the latest decision.
The company explains that the GDP has changed data to the trade extract, but has not cancelled the notary contract for the transfer of quotas.
Moreover, from the reasoning of the UN decision published in Albanian media, it turns out that the institution itself has distinguished the deficit in registration procedure from the question of validation of the transfer contract.
This is also the argument over which the 2A Group supports the claim that the administrative decision cannot be automatically interpreted as restoring contractual rights to the vendor.
According to the company, the regularly linked contract continues to produce legal effects and does not result in a judicial decision declaring it invalid or deciding its solution.
For this stance, the 2A Group relies on Article 690 of the Civil Code and Article 74, provisions 2 of Albanian Trade and Commercial Society Law, which regulates the effects of recording quotas.
Our rights on quotas stem from the contract. QB cannot undo the trade by changing the data to the extract, the company stresses.
What UN found, and why the issue remains open?
The GDP has abolished the 19 October 2026 decision to register the transfer of 47% of quotas from MABCO to 2A Group.
According to the reasoning of the decision, reported by the media in Albania, the census procedure did not administer the National Trade Bank’s written preliminary approval, seen in the insurance agreement on quotas.
This arrangement has been used as a basis for annulment of the registration administrative act.
But this is not equivalent to a judicial decision that makes the trading contract invalid.
It is in this distinction that the opposition of the 2A Group focuses, which estimates that the property issue cannot be considered closed only because of changing trade extracts.
The company considers the UN’s recent decision illegal and has warned it will be rejected through legal means.
Valon Ademi seeks to face evidence at the prosecutor
In addition to contesting quotas, the 2A Group has called for speeding up investigations concerning allegations of fraud that have accompanied conflict between partners.
The company claims it was the first to present the allegations to the competent bodies for the actions of MABCO and Behgjet Pacolli, which it considers deceptive.
In his reaction, Valon Ademi requires that the parties’ claims not remain subject to public charges, but submit to investigation and evidence confrontation.
public opinion needs to know as soon as I can if, Valon Ademi, I cheated Behgjet Pacolli or the opposite happened. )
It calls on the Tirana and SPAK prosecution to act, within their competencies, quickly to clarify circumstances and determine eventual responsibility.
Adam’s position is that neither side should be held accountable on the basis of public charges, without investigating and proving the facts by competent organs.
2A Group rejects Timur Kulibayev’s alleged involvement
In the final part of the response, the 2A Group has also made a warning about the future of the project.
The company flatly opposes the possibility of crossing Vlora Airport, owned by Compartment Bernina or Timur Kulibayev, warning that it will use legal means to protect its interests.
Vlora’s airport will never become the property of Compartment Bernina nor Timur Kulibayev, the statement said.
This attitude presents the company’s opposition to a scenario it considers unacceptable, without implying that such a move has been proved.
The impact that is not solved solely by amending the registry
Recent developments have turned to attention the difference between the registered status of quotas and the rights that parties claim stems from contractual agreements.
For the time being, the UN administrative decision has abolished the registration of 47% of quotas, while the 2A Group continues to reject this decision-making and claims its contract remains valid.
In the absence of a final solution from competent bodies, party claims on ownership and eventual responsibility remain open issues.
For the 2A Group, the message is clear: changing trade extract has not closed the legal dispute and the company does not give up the 49% claim of Vlora Airport quotas.
In this approach, crucial ones are expected to be the content and legal effects of the contract, the provisions of the safeguarding agreement and decisions made by competent institutions.
Until then, one thing remains clear: the annulment and the worthlessness of the contract are not the same legal decision.
The signal where the truth speaks before the news!
Source Layer: Signal
