FLASH
Shkruar nga Pamfleti
The Constitutional Court has set a deadline of 30 days for the deputies to constitute the Assembly, recognizing the Serb List, as the majority of the Serb community, the unlimited right to propose a candidate for vice president within this deadline.
According to the latest ruling, the Serbian List can continue to nominate its candidate for vice-president even after all the names of its deputies have been exhausted. As long as this party does not refuse to make proposals, the lottery mechanism, envisaged as an unblocking tool, cannot be applied.
The decision does not foresee any alternative mechanism for unblocking the situation in the event that the Serbian List, until the expiration of the 30-day deadline, continues to repeat its proposals without achieving the election of the vice-president.
Unlike the latest ruling, a preliminary ruling by the Constitutional Court offers another possibility for unblocking. Judgment KO265/25 states that, in exceptional circumstances, the Assembly may be considered constituted and continue functioning even without the election of one of the members of the Presidency, provided that the Presidency has a quorum.
The Court emphasizes that this applies in cases where the constitutional right of proposal is not exercised or is used to obstruct the process, or when, despite the will of the majority of deputies, the election of the Presidency becomes impossible.
The Vetëvendosje Movement has not stated whether it will implement any of these options. The party's elected MP, Adnan Rrustemi, has assessed that the Constitutional Court has shown contradictions in its judgments on the same issue.
He mentioned the case of LVV as a parliamentary majority, for which the Court had set a limit of up to three nominations, while for the Serbian List, according to him, a different standard was set.
"In less than four months, we have had several decisions of the Constitutional Court that differ from each other on the same subject ," said Rrustemi, adding that the latest verdict does not serve the constitution of the Assembly.
Lawyer Anita Shabani-Cacaj has a different opinion, saying that this is not a case of inconsistency on the part of the Court. According to her, the previous judgment dealt with procedural limitations of the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly, while the final decision addressed violations of the Constitution.
She believes that the current verdict could help the constitution, if there is political will for an agreement.
"The court neither blocks nor unblocks the Assembly. The solution depends on the deputies and the parliamentary majority, which in this case is the LVV, which must reach a political consensus with the Serbian List ," Cacaj declared.
The Vetëvendosje Movement, to which the Speaker of the Assembly belongs, has not announced which unblocking mechanism they will use in the session, in case the Serb List continues to use its right to propose without restriction.
Lini një Përgjigje