Myrto Security, the private security company whose licence was revoked following violent incidents during a protest in Zvërnec in May 2026, has emerged as part of a winning consortium in a public tender worth approximately €2 million awarded by Albania’s Electricity Distribution System Operator (OSSH) in Elbasan.
 |
The tender was announced in August 2026, with a maximum budget of 184.735 million lek, equivalent to approximately €1.99 million at the exchange rate at the time.
 |
The 1.3A Licence Requirement
The tender documents specified that one of the main qualification requirements was possession of a Type 1.3A licence. This authorisation is fundamental to the activities of private physical security companies, allowing them to obtain permission from the Director General of the State Police to provide security services for properties, institutions, events and individuals.
However, Myrto Security had already had its licence revoked by the State Police on June 1, 2026, following an administrative investigation into its conduct during the confrontation with protesters in Zvërnec.
This raises questions about how the company was able to participate in the OSSH tender and be included in the winning consortium despite the earlier licence revocation.
Myrto Security and the Violence During the Zvërnec Protest
The incident dates back to May 30, 2026, when residents and activists from Vlora held a protest against the destruction of the Zvërnec area in connection with a tourism development project involving Jared Kushner, son-in-law of US President Donald Trump.
Local residents opposed restrictions on their access to the coast and raised concerns about the ownership of the land designated for the planned resort.
During the demonstration, private security personnel from Major Security and Myrto Security were stationed behind a fenced-off area, having been contracted by the developer.
The confrontation escalated when security personnel forcibly seized protester Eduard Subashi and dragged him for more than 100 metres, according to the reports. The incident became one of the most widely discussed episodes of the protest movement later known as the “Flamingo Revolution”, named after the rare birds threatened by the proposed development.
The State Police announced the following day that it had revoked the licences of both companies after completing administrative investigations.
What the State Police Found
In its official announcement of June 1, the State Police said that both Myrto Security and Major Security had been found in violation of the law governing private physical security services.
Regarding Myrto Security, the authorities stated that the company had failed to take the necessary measures to secure the site and had not properly implemented procedures regulating the entry and exit of people and vehicles.
According to the police findings, the company had not maintained a register of authorised individuals and vehicles. As a result, on May 30, unidentified people were allowed to enter the fenced property.
The State Police further reported that these individuals intervened during the protest without legal authority, assaulted and forcibly dragged a demonstrator, causing bodily injuries, and threw stones and other objects at protesters from inside the property.
The police stated that Myrto Security personnel had taken no preventive action to stop these individuals or remove them from the site.
On the basis of these findings, the Director General of the State Police signed the decision revoking Myrto Security's Type 1.3A licence on June 1, 2026.
How Did the Company Qualify for the OSSH Contract?
The central issue now concerns the company's participation in the tender announced just two months after its licence was revoked.
The tender required participating companies to hold a valid Type 1.3A licence, while Myrto Security subsequently appeared as a member of the winning consortium alongside Juer Security.
The documents and information cited by Boldnews.al raise questions about whether Myrto Security had obtained a new licence, whether the consortium relied on the qualification documents of its other member, or whether the tendering process failed to properly verify the company's eligibility.
The available information does not establish which of these explanations applies. Clarification from OSSH and the relevant licensing authorities is therefore essential to establish how the consortium met the tender requirements and whether Myrto Security was legally authorised to provide the contracted services.
The case places the spotlight on the public procurement process and the verification of licensing requirements, particularly when a company previously sanctioned by the State Police later appears among the winners of a major public contract.