Nezir Kraki, an elected lawmaker from the Vetëvendosje Movement, has commented on the latest developments concerning the constitution of the Assembly of the Republic of Kosovo. According to him, the responsibility for completing this process lies with the lawmakers, not the President.
Kraki explained that the President’s duty is to convene the session and enable the start of parliamentary activity. After that, he said, lawmakers, once they receive their mandates, take their oaths and are equipped with the active tools needed for their work, have 30 days to act. He said this follows the same logic as the case of the President or the 60-day period clarified by the Court.
Të lidhura
None found
Referring to previous developments surrounding the Assembly, Kraki recalled a period of 1.5 years when, as he put it, they were ready every day for its constitution, while the other parties had barricaded themselves against them to prevent it from happening. According to him, the constitutional right underpinning the process had become so clear, up to a certain point, that almost everyone in Kosovo had understood its essence.
He compared the current situation with previous attempts to form the Assembly. Kraki said that, after the first deadlock, all the parties appeared to have learned lessons, but the same game was later repeated. In the second attempt, he said, the deadlock coincided with the presidential and legislative calendars, introducing a new variable into the equation that blocked the process for a second time.
He recalled that, although the opportunities existed, in the second case the Assembly was constituted and the Government was voted in, but the process produced no result when it came time to elect the President.
According to Kraki, both possible scenarios have now been tried. He said the first version was seen from November to February, when several numbers were missing and the constitution of the Assembly could not be completed. In the second attempt, the Assembly was formed, but the failure occurred over the President.
Kraki stressed that this is the third time and, since the other two alternatives have been tested, more time should be taken this time, creating space for discussions and meetings. He cited the fact that meetings are being held and that there is a willingness to engage constructively as a positive development. According to him, the effort to find solutions and avoid the failure experienced last time is not a tragedy.
Regarding the deadline, the elected Vetëvendosje lawmaker said it should be determined in relation to the actual and effective time lawmakers have available to fulfill their responsibility.
He referred to the Court’s judgment, saying that when it was published, it set a specific period of 30 days, from one date to another. Kraki added that this determination was far from a merely civil and apolitical calculation of the calendar, since several months had passed since the constitutive session had begun.
Explaining how, in his view, the 30-day deadline should be counted, Kraki recalled a position he had published several days earlier on Facebook and in several media outlets. He said that, if it is accepted that the process has a deadline, as the Court has specified deadlines, then the 30 days that assign lawmakers the responsibility to act must be guaranteed to them as actual and effective working time, beginning from the moment they take their oaths.
Kraki argued that scheduling the session is not the lawmakers’ responsibility. To illustrate this, he offered the hypothetical example of a President scheduling the constitutive session on the 30th day at 10 p.m., which would leave lawmakers only two hours to complete the constitution of the Assembly.
For this reason, he reiterated that responsibility for constituting the Assembly belongs to the lawmakers, while the President must convene the session and set parliamentary life in motion. According to him, once a lawmaker receives a mandate, takes the oath and has the active tools needed for their work available, the 30-day deadline begins, just as in the case of the President or the 60-day period clarified by the Court.
In conclusion, Kraki said that if the LDK withdraws from negotiations on co-governance, then there is no alternative but to conclude that the parties on the other side have other objectives, are seeking to increase their percentage and want the country to go to elections again.
