The Supreme Court Panel has rejected as unfounded the appeal of the Vetëvendosje Movement filed against the decision of the Electoral Complaints and Appeals Panel (ECAP), dated 22.05.2026.
The complaint concerned the rejection of the request of the political entity LVV to hold a political rally in "Skënderbeu" Square in Pristina, for the June 7 elections.
"In the appeal filed with the Supreme Court, LVV claimed that ECAP had incorrectly applied Article 4 of the Electoral Regulation No. 07/2024 and that the decision of this institution is deficient in reasoning, emphasizing that the request of the other political entity, the Democratic Party of Kosovo (PDK), dated 30.04.2026, could not create procedural advantage, since at that time the Municipal Election Commission (MEC) in Pristina had not yet been constituted," the court said.
After reviewing the complaint claims, the response to the complaint and all the case files, the Supreme Court said that it assessed that the complaint is unfounded and that the ECAP decision “is fair, legal and based on the relevant provisions of the Law on General Elections and the Electoral Regulation No. 07/2024 on the Election Campaign, Campaign Monitoring and Financial Declaration”.
The Supreme Court found that the Municipal Election Commission in Pristina had acted in accordance with Article 4 of Regulation No. 07/2024, according to which the MEC may reject the request of a political entity if the requested space has been previously reserved by another political entity.
"From the case files it results that the political entity PDK had submitted the request to hold a political rally at "Skënderbeu" Square on 30.04.2026, while LVV had submitted the request on 08.05.2026, for the same date and location. The court assessed that Regulation No. 07/2024 only sets the deadline for submitting notifications for political rallies and does not provide for restrictions regarding the time of submitting requests before the MEC becomes operational."
The Supreme Court also found that the claims of the LVV regarding the lack of reasoning in the ECAP decision are unfounded, as the ECAP had sufficiently addressed the issue of the functionalization of the MEC and had provided clear legal reasons based on the applicable provisions.
Consequently, the Supreme Court found that the factual situation was correctly established, that no procedural violations or incorrect application of the law were found, and that the complaints of the political entity LVV were not supported by relevant evidence. Therefore, the complaint was rejected as unfounded, while the ECAP decision was left in force.
t7 live
