FLASH
Shkruar nga Pamfleti
Lawyer Jordan Daci has commented on the decision of the GJKKO to suspend Deputy Prime Minister Belinda Balluku from office, at the request of SPAK, analyzing the legal basis and possible constitutional conflicts that this case creates.
Speaking on the show " Review ", Daci highlighted the ambiguities in the law regarding the categories of officials to whom this security measure can be applied, stressing that the measure imposed at the request of SPAK raises serious constitutional issues and creates the possibility of a conflict of powers between the judiciary and the executive.
According to him, the law is unclear on the application of this measure to senior political leaders and only the Constitutional Court can determine whether the court has interfered with the powers of the Prime Minister.
" Wherever an expanded interpretation has been sought, it has been done by referring to Article 103 of the Constitution, which states that a member of the Council of Ministers enjoys the immunity of a deputy," he added. The second paragraph states that this measure does not apply to persons directly elected by the people. This also explains the ambiguity created by the terminology of the law. It is an unclear term and creates uncertainty in understanding whether we are dealing with persons directly or indirectly elected by the people ," he said.
According to Daci, in Albania only mayors are truly directly elected by citizens, while all other political positions stem from parties.
Daci emphasized that the immunity of ministers, the nature of the position and the role of the prime minister in the composition of the government make the case unusual and difficult to interpret, while warning that the prime minister's request for constitutional clarification is legitimized only if a conflict of powers is actually proven, while underlining that the suspension of a member of the government cabinet can be considered an interference in the constitutional powers of the prime minister.
“ What is being raised today is: can this measure be applied to senior leaders, such as a member of the cabinet? On the one hand, the prime minister determines the composition of the executive; on the other hand, the court says that it is implementing a security measure. The prime minister’s interest ends only if a conflict of powers is established. If the conflict is only hypothetical, then the interest does not stand. In my opinion, the request is not legitimate – it is legitimated only if a conflict of powers actually exists ,” he said.
According to the lawyer, Edi Rama has raised a legitimate hypothesis, but one that should only be evaluated by the Constitutional Court:
" Mr. Rama is right in the hypothesis he raises, but for it to stand, the Constitutional Court must say so ," Daci declared.
He points out that, from the Prime Minister's perspective, the judiciary is interfering in the composition of the government, an act that is an exclusive political competence.
" His idea is that the acts of the judiciary are changing the government cabinet, while changing the cabinet is a political act of the prime minister, together with the president and parliament ," Daci said.
But, according to him, the court claims that it is not replacing a cabinet member, but only suspending him, as part of security measures.
" This article was taken from the Italian Code of Criminal Procedure, but what happened in 2016 is that the government officials themselves waived their immunity ," he stressed.
Për zotin Daci ; mendoj se ligji është i qartë flet për persona të zgjedhur jo funksione të zgjedhura ( siç është kryebashkiaku a kryekomunari)por në kushtet e shqipêrisë ku një palë e shohin të bardhën të bardhë dhe pala tjetër e sheh të zezë e askush nuança të së bardhës ligjit duhen shkruar duke i sqaruar germë për germë dhe Daci kostitucionalist i fortë nuk arrin ta ndajë tog fjalëshin person i zgjedhur nga tog fjalëshi funksione të zgjedhura.