FLASH
Shkruar nga Pamfleti
When constitutional judge Elsa Toska suddenly resigned in September of last year, few thought that her replacement would pave the way for an institutional crisis.
She, along with Holta Zaçaj and Sonila Bejte, were the three members who should be replaced by 2025, according to the Constitutional Court renewal scheme.
The body that had appointed him, the Assembly, opened the competition for the new judge, declaring that the mandate would last until 2028.
The only one who claimed a violation was MP Jorida Tabaku, who, through a single post on Facebook, accused Parliament Speaker Elisa Spiropali of extending the mandate in question to 2028, when it should end in 2025, and disrupting the renewal scheme with 1/3 of the members.
At that time, no one from the parliamentarians spoke, not even Mrs. Tabaku.
But the debate over Holta Zaçaj's mandate forced the Constitutional Court to issue a decision that, beyond her case, also recognized the scheme of refreshing the position every three years with 3 members.
But in the case of Sonila Bejte's mandate, the Court's decision was not considered sufficient for Speaker Zaçaj. She chose silence, forcing the president to intervene in the role of the appointing authority.
Although the president's request was to declare the end of his term, the Constitutional Court decided to treat it as a judicial matter. A choice openly criticized by the Supreme Court, as evidenced by documents published the day before by Report TV.
Like the Supreme Court, the Assembly has also been asked for an opinion by the Constitutional Court. In the letter that the Assembly refused to make available officially, but which was obtained by Report TV through a source, it appears that the parliament has taken a step back. It admits that they may have been wrong when they decided that the successor to Judge Elsa Toska would remain in office until 2028. And for this they are seeking a final interpretation from the Constitutional Court.
"If we refer to the spirit of decision no. 84 of the Constitutional Court, issued after the declaration of the vacancy by the Assembly, in the calculations of the term of the beginning of Ms. Toska's mandate, it is presumed, although not exhaustively, that the time of the delay in the selection of Ms. Toska should have been included, i.e. the period from 25.04.2016 to the date of the oath before the President. In this context, we assess as an added value the consideration by the Constitutional Court of the need or not for the re-declaration of the vacancy by the Assembly", - the Assembly's letter states.
In conclusion, the Parliament assesses the need for additions, clarifications and a final interpretation by the Court regarding this moment. / Shqiptarja.com
Lini një Përgjigje