Written by: Kadri Kryeziu
Political disagreements in the election of the Speaker of the Assembly are not uncommon. As a reminder, in 2023, Kevin McCarthy was elected Speaker of the House of Representatives in the US Congress, after only the 15th attempt.
Courts, including the Constitutional Court, cannot become forums where political disputes are resolved. The will FOR or AGAINST a political agreement is a democratic right that cannot be imposed by anyone, including the Constitutional Court. If the Constitutional Court attempts to impose the will for a necessary agreement, then the Court itself violates the fundamental rights protected by the Constitution.
We must speak in strict legal language. Currently, there is no constitutional crisis in Kosovo, nor is there a risk of collapse of the constitutional order, as some politicians are alarming. This is also the reason why the latest verdict is calm and without alarming tones. We simply need to get used to institutionally managing even awkward political situations.
The current situation is one where we should speak only in strict legal language, without alarming political tones. Currently, there is no constitutional crisis in Kosovo, nor is there a risk of collapse of the constitutional order, as some politicians and television speakers are alarming.
The Constitutional Court has set a 30-day deadline for the constitution. So, by open or secret ballot, it doesn't matter, within 30 days, the deputies must elect the President and Vice-Presidents of the Assembly. But this does not mean that the deputies must necessarily agree on the name of the Speaker of Parliament. The Constitution guarantees them the right not to agree on the name of the Speaker of Parliament, even despite the pressure of the 30-day deadline. If the Assembly fails to be constituted within the 30-day deadline, then we are faced with the situation where the 120 elected deputies, and confirmed by the CEC, have failed to constitute the Assembly. This moment is a new legal fact, unproven so far in our parliamentary history. That's it, nothing more.
The possibility of a constitutional crisis, or the collapse of the constitutional order, arises only if the Constitutional Court does not act in defense of its decision. Therefore, the Court must necessarily tell us how it will act on the first day after the expiration of the 30-day deadline.
And, theoretically, the Court has only two courses of action:
1. The Court decides to terminate the mandate of 120 current deputies, due to their collective responsibility in failing to constitute the Assembly, according to the deadline set by the Court. In this case, the Court orders the CEC to replace the current deputies with others from the competing lists of political parties. After the replacement, the 30-day deadline begins to run again.
2. The Court orders the President of the Republic to announce new elections, as a result of the failure to fulfill the constitutional obligation to constitute the Assembly, according to the deadline set by the Court.
The epilogue of this process will be valuable for later studies, because it will establish a valuable constitutional precedent in our parliamentary practice.
(the author is a Professor of Law and Constitutional Judiciary, drafter of the Constitution of Kosovo, and Vice President of the Constitutional Court in the period 2009-2015)
edition
t7 live
