The Special Court or the president?” – PDK and LVV still far from a coalition, analysts explain possible scenarios

Following the latest meeting between PDK Chairman Bedri Hamza and Prime Minister Albin Kurti, the issue of possible cooperation between these two major political forces has once again returned to the center of public attention.

At the heart of the debate is the draft law amending and supplementing the Law on the Specialist Chambers of Kosovo in The Hague, which the PDK has declared itself ready to discuss and vote on. In addition, the two also discussed the election of the country’s next president.

Speaking to reporters before the parliamentary session, Hamza said that the issue of the president was mentioned during the meeting with Kurti, but that, according to him, no specific names were discussed.

“We did not get into names; we did not discuss it. If the law passes, we are open to other issues,” Hamza said.

His statement has raised questions over whether the adoption of the draft law on the Specialist Chambers could be the initial step toward broader cooperation between the PDK and the Vetëvendosje Movement, especially at a time when the issue of the country’s new head of state represents one of the hottest points on the political agenda.

On the other hand, the LVV has made it clear that cooperation on specific issues should not be understood as a sign of readiness for a general political agreement with the PDK.

Parliament Speaker Albulena Haxhiu stressed that she does not consider a coalition with the PDK necessary, adding that the two parties can cooperate on specific issues without necessarily having a governing partnership.

“To have a common position regarding September 16, we do not need a coalition. We need joint actions, coordination on every action ahead of us, and a contribution from each side,” Haxhiu said.

She was even more explicit when asked about the possibility of a coalition with the PDK.

“However, I do not see a coalition with the PDK as necessary, not at this stage. This concerns the decision, but also our position toward the PDK. We can cooperate in opposing the unjust decision of September 16. But I do not see them as governing partners. This is my personal position,” the parliamentary speaker said.

These statements have raised the question on the political scene of whether the PDK and LVV are moving toward a limited compromise on specific issues, or whether the Kurti-Hamza meeting could be the first step toward a comprehensive agreement.

On the one hand, the PDK has left open the possibility of discussing other issues after the law on the Specialist Chambers is adopted, while on the other, the LVV has stressed that parliamentary cooperation should not necessarily turn into a coalition or governing partnership.

This makes the issue of electing the president particularly important. Can a consensus be reached on the head of state without a broader agreement between the PDK and LVV? Could the draft law on the Specialist Chambers become the starting point for a larger political agreement?

Qarri: This is the last moment for a PDK-LVV agreement

Analyst Gani Qarri, asked by “Bota sot” about this political development, said that following the Hamza-Kurti meeting and on the eve of the election of a new president, it is time for the parties to consider the possibility of a more comprehensive agreement.

According to him, the aim should not be only partial agreements, but an arrangement that would resolve some of Kosovo’s key institutional issues.

“After the meeting on Sunday between PDK Chairman Bedri Hamza and Prime Minister Albin Kurti, with one week remaining until the election of the new president, the issue of the draft law on the Specialist Chambers has returned to the center of political developments. Therefore, this is the last moment to consider the possibilities, not for partial agreements, but for a comprehensive agreement based on principles, so that both issues can be resolved in real time.”

Qarri warned that the lack of an agreement could once again send Kosovo to early elections, with no guarantee that a new process would resolve the problems.

“Otherwise, by mid-November Kosovo could once again be unnecessarily forced to hold early elections, which again may not necessarily resolve the problem that has long kept the establishment and completion of the institutions, including the president of the state, on hold, while clarifying the situation and guaranteeing stable governance of Kosovo in the next mandate.”

According to him, the situation is even more complicated because of the uncertainty surrounding the institutional steps that would follow if the election of the president failed.

“The worst thing is that now, with less than a week remaining to elect the head of state, even amid this chaotic political uncertainty threatening the country, the current legal provisions of the Constitutional Court do not provide an adequate solution or direct intervention to quickly remove the problem if, even after the expiry of the legal deadline, the Assembly fails to elect the new president…”

Qarri sees Hamza’s statement as a positive signal that could create room for rapprochement between the PDK and LVV.

“What creates more hope this time than in the past is the statement by the PDK chairman that, at the meeting with Prime Minister Kurti, according to Hamza, the issue of electing the president was discussed, and that his party is ready to discuss this topic with the Vetëvendosje Movement, as well as the statement by the head of the Democratic League of Kosovo parliamentary group, Jehona Lushaku, that the LDK is also ready to contribute to the election of the president.”

He assessed that the situation created by the decision of the Specialist Chambers could create room for greater rapprochement among the parliamentary parties.

“The current political metamorphosis shows that the situation created after the decision of the Special Court has significantly influenced the rapprochement of the positions of the main parties in the Assembly, both government and opposition, a welcome rapprochement that could finally lead to the election of the president and the end of the political deadlock and the prolonged blockade of state institutions.”

Qarri insisted that, under the current circumstances, an agreement on only one issue would not be enough.

“It should be emphasized on this occasion that, although significant differences between the parties still exist, following the guilty verdict by the Specialist Chambers, it is extremely necessary and a decisive moment for the main parliamentary parties to reach not merely a simple agreement on specific issues, but, particularly between the PDK and LVV, a genuine and clear political agreement is essential…”

He also mentioned the need for institutional cooperation regarding further legal proceedings.

“The situation in which Kosovo currently finds itself, following the draconian decision of the Specialist Chambers, does not allow partial agreements or limitations to specific issues, but obliges the parliamentary parties and the entire political spectrum of the country to reach a comprehensive agreement…”

In conclusion, Qarri warned of political consequences if the parties fail to reach a compromise on electing the president and completing the institutions.

“Therefore, if, even in the current unclear situation in which we find ourselves as a country because of the extraordinary pressure caused by the guilty verdict of the Special Court, the PDK and AAK once again become an obstacle to the election of the president and oppose the establishment of stable state institutions, Kosovo risks once again being left without state institutions because of them, facing an institutional deadlock and the constant repetition of early elections…”

Halilaj: The president must not be the result of political bargaining

Unlike Qarri, Guxo member and lawyer Gazmend Halilaj views the possibility of a broad political agreement between the PDK and LVV with greater reservations.

According to him, a clear distinction must be made between a parliamentary opportunity concerning a specific issue and a political agreement between the two parties.

“The latest meeting between Prime Minister Albin Kurti and PDK Chairman Bedri Hamza has brought the possibility of an agreement between the two political entities back into the public debate. At the center of this discussion are the draft law amending and supplementing the Law on the Specialist Chambers of Kosovo in The Hague and the process of electing the president.”

Speaking to “Bota sot,” Halilaj stressed that an agreement on a specific issue should not automatically be interpreted as a political coalition.

“From my perspective as a lawyer, a clear distinction must be made between a parliamentary agreement on a specific issue and a political agreement between two parties. The fact that two entities may share positions on a particular issue does not necessarily imply the establishment of a coalition or a change in their political relations.”

According to him, any potential amendments to the law on the Specialist Chambers must also be addressed on the basis of legal arguments and institutional interest.

“The issue of the Specialist Chambers is one of particular legal and institutional importance. For this reason, any amendment to the law must be addressed on the basis of legal arguments and institutional interest, and not as a bargaining chip for other political interests.”

Regarding the election of the president, Halilaj called for a transparent process and the broadest possible parliamentary consensus.

“It is equally important that the issue of electing the president not be reduced to a secret agreement between two parties. The president is a constitutional institution, and the process of electing him must be built on the broadest possible parliamentary consensus,” he said.

He stressed that the differences between the PDK and LVV may continue to exist even if the parties find common ground on specific issues.

However, Halilaj sees it as problematic if an institutional issue is turned into a political exchange.

“This does not mean that the PDK and LVV must agree on everything. On the contrary, in a parliamentary democracy, it is normal for parties to have deep political differences and at the same time find common ground on certain matters of state.

What would be problematic would be for an institutional issue to be turned into a package of political bargaining, where a vote on a particular law is made conditional on positions, party interests or agreements that have not been made public.”

In conclusion, he stressed that an institutional compromise should not be equated with a general political agreement.

“In this sense, dialogue between political entities is essential, but equally essential is preserving the distinction between an institutional compromise and a political agreement,” Gazmend Halilaj concluded to “Bota sot”.