FLASH
Shkruar nga Pamfleti
The Constitutional Court stated that the Assembly did not implement the decision of the GJK regarding the mandate of the former minister, when it voted not to send the report to the Constitutional Court.
The Constitutional Court clarified the contested decision for the mandate of Olta Xhaçka, where on July 10 the decision of the Assembly was overturned.
The Constitutional Court stated that the Assembly did not implement the decision of the GJK regarding the mandate of the former minister, when it voted not to send the report to the Constitutional Court.
The Court finds that in the essence of the request, the binding power of the Court's decision, which determined the obligation of the Assembly to initiate a constitutional process of checking the incompatibility with the Constitution of the mandate of deputy Olta Xhaçka, has been called into question, which was, according to the applicant, no longer less than 1/10 of the deputies, also the cause of the birth of the constitutional dispute between the parties, therefore, according to the petitioner not less than 1/5 of the deputies, has brought the need for the final interpretation of the constitutional provisions.
The Court also notes that the procedure for finding incompatibility in the exercise of the mandate of MP Olta Xhaçka in the Assembly was set in motion through two motions presented by no less than 1/10 of the deputies, these motions were signed by 29 deputies in total.
Next, the Court notes that the Council on Mandates has decided to examine the motions in a single parliamentary procedure. Consequently, referring to the specific deputies who signed the motions and those who signed the request, the Court notes that the request as far as the petitioner is concerned, no less than 1/10 of the deputies, bears the signature of at least 14 deputies who also set the procedure in motion parliamentary for the finding of incompatibility in the exercise of the mandate of MP Olta Xhaçka. For the above, the Court considers unfounded the complaint of the interested entity, the Assembly, for the applicant's non-legitimacy.
The court also notes that in the new dispute created for the exercise of constitutional competence due to the disputed decision-making of the Assembly, the petitioner, no less than 1/10 of the deputies, is a party to the conflict. Based on this, the applicant's claims that decision no. 41/2024 of the Assembly has created a conflict of competences, they have a constitutional nature and the rights claimed as violated are directly provided for by the Constitution, which constitutes a sufficient argument to legitimize the petitioner in setting in motion the constitutional trial in the sense of Article 70, point 4 , of the Constitution. Consequently, the Court deems unfounded the complaint of the interested subject, MP Olta Xhaçka, for the applicant's non-legitimacy.
Set:
Partial acceptance of the request.
Resolution of the conflict/disagreement of competence between the Assembly of
the Republic of Albania and the constitutional subject in conflict by not less than 1/10 of the deputies.
Repeal of decision no. 41/2024, dated 11.04.2024 "On not sending the motion to the Constitutional Court" of the Assembly of Albania, as incompatible with the Constitution of the Republic of Albania.
Obligation of the Assembly of Albania to send to the Constitutional Court
the motion for the incompatibility of the mandate of MP Olta Xhaçka.
This decision is final and enters into force on the day of its publication in the Official Gazette.
Lini një Përgjigje