The constitutive session of the Kosovo Assembly was interrupted again, deepening the political and institutional crisis in the country. Clashes between political entities are keeping the functioning of institutions blocked, while the possibility of new elections is increasingly being discussed.

The request of the leader of the Vetëvendosje Movement, Albin Kurti, for more time in order to reach an agreement with other parties has reopened the debate about a possible political compromise. However, alongside a consensual solution, the scenario of the country heading to new elections is also being included.

During the last session, tensions increased after an incident where Alliance MP Time Kadrijaj threw eggs at Kurti. As a result, the session chairman Avni Dehari called for security intervention.

The repeated political confrontations and episodes inside the Assembly hall have raised serious questions about the possibility of unblocking the institutions. It remains unclear whether the parties will find a common path or whether Kosovo will face another electoral process.

Vuniqi: Quorum is being used as a tool in the political clash

Opinionist Agim Vuniqi, in a statement for “Bota sot”, sees the quorum issue as part of the political conflict and not simply a procedural matter.

According to him, there is an inconsistency in the positions of the opposition parties, since the same entities that today oppose an agreement to overcome the institutional deadlock have in the past politically cooperated with the Serbian List to secure parliamentary majorities.

Vuniqi argues that the paradox becomes visible when today’s statements are compared with previous actions. The parties that currently refuse a political agreement to resolve the quorum problem and to elect the President have previously reached agreements with the Serbian List for co-governance.

He also recalls that these entities have secured the quorum and the necessary votes from the Serbian List for the establishment of the Specialist Chambers. In that process, constitutional and legal amendments were adopted in accordance with the legislation in force for the period for which former KLA leaders, including Hashim Thaçi and others, are accused.

According to Vuniqi, today the same parties demand that Vetëvendosje not only propose the candidate for President, but also secure the votes for his election on its own, without first giving any political guarantee of support.

For the opinionist, this approach does not represent a genuine parliamentary compromise. He assesses that the responsibility for securing the votes is being placed solely on the force that won the elections, while the opposition retains the possibility of blocking the process.

“In practice, the demand is that the candidate be proposed and then the proposer themselves find a way to elect him. This is not a spirit of compromise, but a complete transfer of responsibility to the election winner, while the opposition keeps the right to obstruct the process,” Vuniqi states.

He points out that Vetëvendosje has signaled a compromise solution, not ruling out the possibility that the post of Assembly Speaker or that of President be included in a consensual agreement.

Such a formula, according to him, would not be unfamiliar to Kosovo’s constitutional practice. Vuniqi cites the example of the election of Atifete Jahjaga, when the crisis was overcome through a political agreement between parliamentary forces, after the Constitutional Court’s intervention regarding the process of electing the President in the Pacolli case.

Vuniqi acknowledges that the current circumstances are not the same as those of the past period, both politically and legally. However, he emphasizes that previous experience shows that compromise can serve as a mechanism for making institutions functional.

“This does not imply that the situation then is identical to today’s. The differences are evident in the political and legal aspects. But the precedent shows that compromise in parliamentary democracies is not a sign of weakness, but a way to make institutions functional,” he says.

According to Vuniqi, the main issue is not whether there should be compromise, but why political agreements are accepted when they serve the interests of one party and rejected when they aim at institutional unblocking. He notes that if such agreements have been used for forming governments, securing parliamentary majorities, and making decisions with historical and constitutional consequences, then it is difficult to argue that they are unacceptable only in the case of electing the President.

The opinionist warns that the lack of a consistent political stance could turn the quorum from a constitutional requirement into an instrument of blockage.

“Political credibility is built on consistency. In its absence, standards can become double standards, and the quorum, instead of guaranteeing constitutional legitimacy, can be used to obstruct the political rival. Thus arises the question of whether the spirit of the Constitution is being protected or whether the constitutional procedure is being exploited as a weapon in the political clash,” Vuniqi concludes.

Halili: Without institutional compromise, new elections may become inevitable

Professor Nijazi Halili, speaking for “Bota sot”, assesses that the situation can no longer be explained as an ordinary procedural disagreement. According to him, the country is facing a deep political crisis.

Halili says that the parties are seeing the constitution of institutions as a continuation of the electoral race, while emphasizing that the incidents that occurred in the Assembly are unacceptable and concerning.

“The repeated interruption of the constitutive session has taken on greater proportions than a procedural conflict. It testifies to a deep political crisis and a lack of will for compromise. The parties are continuing the electoral battle within the constitution process, although their main duty should be the functionalization of the state,” Halili states.

He describes the provocative actions in the Assembly hall as a worrying development. According to him, when parliamentary debate is replaced by such incidents, tensions exceed the boundaries of democratic competition, the authority of the Assembly is damaged, and citizens’ distrust of politics increases.

The professor assesses that there is still a possibility for a political agreement, but this requires that leaders give up ultimatums, personal interests, and constant accusations against opponents.

“An agreement is still achievable, but for this it is necessary to abandon ultimatums, personal calculations, and the incessant blaming of the other side. If political leaders fail to produce an institutional compromise, new elections will not come as a surprise, but will be the direct result of this political failure,” Halili declares.

He adds that unblocking the institutions is not the responsibility of a single party. The obligation falls on all political entities, especially those that have received the greatest support from citizens.

“Kosovo cannot remain hostage to party bargains and clashes. Institutions are not the property of parties, but state mechanisms that belong to the citizens. All entities must bear responsibility for resolving the deadlock, but a greater burden falls on those that have received the broadest mandate from the citizens,” Nijazi Halili concluded for “Bota sot”.

The post Gridlock in the Assembly deepens, political compromise fades, and new elections emerge as a possibility appeared first on Albeu.com.

The disrupted resumption of the constitutive session of the Kosovo Assembly has further deepened the political and institutional deadlock in the country.

Albin Kurti, leader of the Vetëvendosje Movement, has asked for more time to reach an agreement with the other political forces, once again bringing both the possibility of a compromise and the prospect of a new election cycle to the forefront of discussion.

Tensions escalated further after Alliance MP Time Kadrijaj threw eggs at Kurti during the latest session, prompting presiding chair Avni Dehari to call security.

The continuing clashes between the parties and incidents in the chamber are raising doubts over whether the sides will find a way to break the institutional deadlock or whether the country is heading toward another round of voting.

Commentator Agim Vuniqi, speaking to “Bota sot,” argues that the quorum is becoming a weapon in the political battle rather than a constitutional principle.

He points to a contradiction in the opposition’s positions, noting that it previously cooperated with the Serbian List to secure parliamentary majorities.

“The paradox of Kosovo politics becomes even more evident when today’s positions are compared with past actions. The same parties that are now avoiding a political agreement to overcome the deadlock over the quorum required to elect the President did not hesitate in the past to reach political agreements with the Serbian List to govern together. These same parties also secured the necessary quorum and votes with the Serbian List to establish the Specialist Chambers, approving constitutional and legal amendments in line with the legislation that was in force during the period for which the former KLA leaders, including Hashim Thaçi and others, stand accused.

“Today, however, these same parties are asking the Vetëvendosje Movement not only to nominate the candidate for President, but also to secure the votes needed to elect that candidate, without first offering any political guarantee of support.”

According to Vuniqi, such an approach does not amount to parliamentary compromise but places the entire burden of finding the votes on the election winner.

“In essence, the demand is: ‘Nominate the candidate and then find a way to elect that candidate yourselves.’ This is not the logic of parliamentary compromise, but a complete transfer of responsibility to the election winner, while the opposition retains the right to block the process.

“In this context, it should not be forgotten that Vetëvendosje has signaled its readiness for a compromise solution, leaving open the possibility that either the position of Assembly Speaker or that of President could form part of a consensual agreement. This would not be the first time in Kosovo’s constitutional practice. The election of Atifete Jahjaga showed that, following the Constitutional Court’s intervention in the presidential election process in the Pacolli case, the crisis was overcome through a political compromise among the parliamentary forces.”

The commentator acknowledges that today’s circumstances differ from those in the past, but insists that history shows political compromise remains a path toward making the institutions functional.

“This does not mean that the circumstances then and now are identical. On the contrary, they differ both politically and legally. Nevertheless, the precedent shows that in parliamentary democracies, compromise is not a weakness but a mechanism for making institutions functional.

“Therefore, the question is not whether there should be a compromise, but why compromise is considered acceptable when it serves the interests of one side and rejected when it is intended to break an institutional deadlock. If political agreements have been acceptable for forming governments, securing parliamentary majorities and making decisions with historic and constitutional consequences, it is difficult to argue that they are unacceptable only when it comes to electing the President.”

Finally, he warns that a lack of political consistency could turn the quorum itself into a blocking tool.

“Consistency is the foundation of political credibility. Without it, standards risk becoming double standards, while the quorum is transformed from a constitutional instrument for guaranteeing legitimacy into a tool for obstructing political competition. This is precisely where the fundamental dilemma arises: Is the spirit of the Constitution being protected, or is constitutional procedure being used as an instrument of political warfare?”

Meanwhile, Professor Nijazi Halili, also speaking to “Bota sot,” views the current situation as more than a procedural dispute, describing it as a deep political crisis.

Halili stresses that the parties are treating the establishment of the institutions as a continuation of the electoral contest and calls the incidents inside the Assembly concerning and unacceptable.

“The repeated interruption of the constitutive session is now more than a procedural disagreement; it has become evidence of a deep political crisis and a lack of willingness to compromise. The political parties are treating the establishment of the institutions as a continuation of the electoral battle, even though their primary responsibility is to make the state functional.

“The incidents inside the Assembly are also concerning and unacceptable. When parliamentary debate is replaced by provocative actions, political tension exceeds the bounds of democratic competition. This damages the Assembly’s authority and deepens citizens’ distrust of politics.”

According to him, a political agreement remains possible, but it requires abandoning ultimatums and narrow calculations.

“A political agreement is still possible, but it requires giving up ultimatums, personal calculations and the practice of constantly blaming the opponent. If political leaders are unable to produce an institutional compromise, then new elections would not come as a surprise, but as a direct consequence of this political failure.”

Halili emphasizes that responsibility for breaking the deadlock rests with all political parties, especially those that received the greatest trust from citizens.

“Kosovo cannot be held hostage by party bargaining and conflicts. The institutions are not the property of political parties; they are mechanisms of the state and belong to the citizens. Responsibility for breaking the deadlock rests with all political parties, but particularly with those that received the largest mandate from the citizens,” Nijazi Halili concluded for “Bota sot.”

The post Assembly Deadlock and Escalating Clashes: Is Kosovo Heading Toward Early Elections? appeared first on Albeu.com.

The political and institutional crisis in Kosovo has deepened after the latest suspension of the constitutive session of the Assembly.

The possibility of an agreement between political parties has returned to the discussion after the leader of the Vetëvendosje Movement, Albin Kurti, asked for more time to reach a deal with other parties. However, alongside compromise, the scenario of new elections remains open.

Tensions escalated during the last parliamentary session when Alliance deputy Time Kadrijaj threw eggs at Kurti. After the incident, the session chair, Avni Dehari, called for security to intervene.

The continuous political clashes and incidents in the Assembly hall have raised the dilemma of whether the parties will find a way to make the institutions functional or whether Kosovo will enter another electoral cycle.

Vuniqi: The quorum is being used for political battle and not as a constitutional principle

Commenting on developments for “Bota sot,” commentator Agim Vuniqi assesses that the quorum is turning into a tool of conflict between parties.

According to him, the current stances of the opposition entities contradict their previous actions, when they even struck political agreements with the Serb List to create majorities in the Assembly.

Vuniqi says the contradiction of Kosovar politics is clearly seen when today’s behavior is compared with that of the past. Parties that now refuse an agreement to overcome the quorum deadlock in electing the President had previously cooperated politically with the Serb List for co-governance.

He recalls that the same entities, through the Serb List, had secured the quorum and the necessary votes for the establishment of the Specialist Chambers. In that case, legal and constitutional changes were approved in accordance with the legislation in force for the period with which the charges against former KLA leaders are linked, among them Hashim Thaçi and others.

But today, according to Vuniqi, these parties expect the Vetëvendosje Movement to propose the presidential candidate and, at the same time, to secure the votes for his election on its own, without receiving any prior political commitment for support.

The commentator argues that such a request cannot be called a parliamentary compromise, because the entire burden of finding the votes is imposed on the entity that won the elections.

In essence, he says, Vetëvendosje is being asked to present the candidate and then find the formula to elect him alone. Vuniqi considers this a complete transfer of responsibility to the winner, while the opposition continues to preserve the possibility of blocking the process.

He points out that Vetëvendosje has shown signs of being ready for a compromise solution, not excluding the possibility that the post of Assembly Speaker or that of the President be included in a consensual agreement.

Such a formula, according to Vuniqi, would not be unknown to Kosovo’s constitutional practice. He cites the example of the election of Atifete Jahjaga, when the crisis was overcome through political compromise of the parliamentary forces, after the Constitutional Court’s intervention in the presidential election process in the Pacolli case.

Vuniqi admits that the current context does not fully match the circumstances of that time, either legally or politically. Nevertheless, according to him, this precedent shows that in a parliamentary democracy compromise does not represent weakness, but serves as a mechanism for putting institutions into motion.

For the commentator, the issue is not whether compromise should happen, but why it is accepted when it suits the interest of one side and opposed when it aims to overcome the institutional blockade.

If political agreements were deemed acceptable for creating governments, building parliamentary majorities, and approving decisions with constitutional and historical consequences, Vuniqi says it is difficult to argue that they cannot be used merely for electing the President.

In conclusion, he warns that the lack of consistency in political standards risks turning the quorum into a blocking instrument.

According to Vuniqi, political credibility is based on consistency. In its absence, double standards are created, while the quorum, from a constitutional mechanism guaranteeing legitimacy, transforms into a tool for obstructing political competition. For this reason, he raises the question of whether the spirit of the Constitution is being protected or whether constitutional procedure is being put in the service of political war.

Halili: Deepening crisis could lead the country to new elections

Professor Nijazi Halili, in a statement to “Bota sot,” says the developments can no longer be seen simply as clashes over procedures, because the country is facing a serious political crisis.

According to him, the repeated suspensions of the constitutive session show a lack of willingness to compromise. Halili assesses that the parties are using the process of institution-building as a continuation of the electoral race, even though their main task is the functioning of the state.

He also considers the incidents that have occurred inside the Assembly as worrying and unacceptable. When parliamentary discussion is replaced by provocative acts, the professor says, political tension goes beyond the boundaries of democratic competition, weakens the authority of the institution, and increases citizens’ distrust of politics.

Halili believes that space for a political agreement continues to exist, but this requires the parties to give up ultimatums, personal interests, and constant attempts to shift blame to the opponent.

If political leaders fail to produce an institutional compromise, he estimates that holding new elections would not come as a surprise, but would be the direct result of this political failure.

According to Halili, no entity is exempt from responsibility for unblocking the institutions, although the heaviest burden belongs to the parties that secured the highest number of votes from citizens.

Nijazi Halili concluded for “Bota sot” that Kosovo cannot remain hostage to party conflicts and bargaining. He stressed that institutions do not belong to parties, but are mechanisms of the state in the service of citizens. The responsibility for making them functional, according to him, falls on all political subjects and especially on those that received the largest mandate from the citizens.

The post Parliamentary deadlock and political tensions: Is Kosovo preparing for new elections? appeared first on Albeu.com.

Even on this 35th day, the protesters’ central demand remains unchanged: the departure of the prime minister. Organizers have said the mobilization will continue until this demand is met.

According to the organizers, the diaspora is also expected to be present in Tirana at today’s protest.

They also said that convoys have been on the move since yesterday, while police have announced that every Albanian citizen entering the country during these days will be subjected to thorough checks. This has been interpreted as an attempt to prevent the diaspora from taking part in the Tirana protest.

A day earlier, at the 34th protest, the rally lasted four hours and unfolded peacefully, unlike what happened during the 32nd and 33rd protests. Those two days were marked by tensions; participant and former KLA soldier Dritan Goxhaj was arrested, while 19 people were arrested on the 33rd day. Alongside the arrests, there was bloodshed, flour and paint throwing, and numerous verbal clashes.

On developments related to security in Albania, the possibility of escalation, and the response of the police and organizers, Albania-based security expert Fatjon Softa spoke to “Bota sot”.

According to Softa, tensions between the sides have been rising.

He believes the biggest concern is the fact that incidents are becoming an expected part of the protests.

“The situation should not be judged only by the number of injured people or the destruction of public property, but by the trend that is being created. When protests are repeated with episodes of violence, this shows that the level of tension between the sides has increased and that prevention mechanisms have not functioned fully. Protest is a constitutional right and must be guaranteed by institutions. It is equally important to ensure public order and the safety of citizens. These are not goals that exclude one another; on the contrary, they must go hand in hand. From a security point of view, what is worrying is that clashes are becoming part of what people expect from protests. This must not be normalized,” Softa said.

According to him, the possibility of escalation is present, although it can be avoided.

“The risk of escalation exists, especially when political tension remains high and institutional dialogue is limited.

The main factors are:

* harsh political rhetoric;

* lack of trust in institutions;

* small groups that may seek confrontation;

* the use of social networks for emotional mobilization or disinformation;

* unrestrained reactions from either side during the protest.

However, escalation is not inevitable. It can be prevented if all sides act responsibly and respect the law,” the expert stressed.

Softa says any use of force must be necessary, proportionate and documented, adding that body cameras were missing to record it.

“The State Police has the legal obligation to guarantee both public order and the exercise of the right to protest. This is a difficult balance. Any use of force must be necessary, proportionate and documented; body cameras were missing to record it. If there has been an overstepping of authority, it must be investigated. If there have been attacks on officers, these too must be dealt with according to the law,” Softa underlined.

He calls for more communication between the police and organizers, while from the latter he expects public distancing from any act of violence, cooperation with authorities to ensure the gathering runs smoothly, and help in identifying and isolating individuals aiming to provoke clashes.

“I would like to see greater investment in communication with organizers, early identification of elements seeking violence and their isolation without creating clashes with peaceful protesters. Police professionalism is measured not only by the ability to intervene, but also by the ability to prevent conflict.

Responsibility is shared.

Institutions must:

* professionally plan protest management;

* maintain continuous communication with organizers;

* use force only as a last resort and in a proportionate way;

* document every incident for transparency and accountability.

Organizers must:

* publicly distance themselves from every act of violence;

* cooperate with authorities to ensure the gathering proceeds smoothly;

* help identify and isolate people who attempt to provoke clashes.

At the end of the day, success is not measured by the number of those detained or injured. It is measured by whether citizens are able to protest freely, while public order is preserved without violence and without infringing fundamental rights,” the expert concluded.

The post Albania’s 35th protest: security expert warns of factors that could trigger escalation appeared first on Albeu.com.

Even on the 35th day, protesters are standing by the same main demand for the resignation of the head of government, while organizers have announced that the protests will continue until this demand is met.

According to the organizers, the diaspora is also expected to arrive in Tirana today.

They also said that convoys set off as early as yesterday, while police announced that every Albanian citizen entering the territory during these days will be subjected to a thorough check. This has been interpreted as an attempt to prevent the diaspora from taking part in the protest in Tirana.

A day earlier, during the 34th protest, citizens demonstrated for four hours and the gathering was peaceful, unlike on the 32nd and 33rd days. Those two protests were accompanied by tensions, during which participant and former KLA soldier Dritan Goxhaj was arrested, while on the 33rd day 19 people were arrested. Alongside the arrests, there was bloodshed, flour and egg throwing, as well as various verbal clashes.

Regarding the security situation in Albania, the possibility of escalation, as well as the response of the police and the organizers, Albania-based security expert Fatjon Softa spoke to “Bota sot.”

According to Softa, tensions between the sides have been rising.

He considers it worrying that clashes are becoming an expected part of the protests.

“The situation should not be viewed only through the number of injured people or the destruction of public property, but through the trend that is being created. When protests are repeated with episodes of violence, this shows that the level of tension between the sides has increased and that prevention mechanisms have not fully functioned. Protest is a constitutional right and must be guaranteed by institutions. It is equally important to ensure public order and the safety of citizens. These are not objectives that exclude one another; on the contrary, they must go hand in hand. From a security point of view, what is worrying is that clashes are becoming part of the expected pattern of protests. This must not be normalized,” Softa stated.

According to the expert, the risk of escalation is present, however, it can be avoided.

“The risk of escalation exists, especially when political tension remains high and institutional dialogue is limited.

Who are the main factors:

* harsh political rhetoric;

* lack of trust in institutions;

* small groups that may seek confrontation;

* the use of social networks for emotional mobilization or disinformation;

* uncontrolled reactions from either side during the protest.

However, escalation is not inevitable. It can be prevented if all sides act responsibly and respect the law,” the expert stressed.

Softa says that any use of force must be necessary, proportionate and documented, adding that body cameras were missing to record it.

“The State Police has the legal obligation to guarantee both public order and the exercise of the right to protest. This is a difficult balance. Any use of force must be necessary, proportionate and documented; body cameras were missing to record it. If there has been an overstepping of authority, it must be investigated. If there have been attacks on officers, those too must be handled according to the law,” Softa underlined.

He calls for more communication between the police and the organizers, while urging the latter to publicly distance themselves from any act of violence, cooperate with the authorities to ensure the smooth running of the gathering, and help identify and isolate people trying to provoke clashes.

“I would like to see more investment in communication with organizers, early identification of elements aiming for violence, and their isolation without creating clashes with peaceful protesters. Police professionalism is measured not only by the ability to intervene, but also by the ability to prevent conflict.

Responsibility is shared.

Institutions must:

* professionally plan the management of protests;

* maintain continuous communication with organizers;

* use force only as a last resort and in a proportionate manner;

* document every incident for transparency and accountability.

Organizers must:

* publicly distance themselves from every act of violence;

* cooperate with authorities to ensure the gathering proceeds smoothly;

* help identify and isolate persons who attempt to provoke clashes.

At the end of the day, success is not measured by the number of those detained or injured. It is measured by whether citizens are able to protest freely, while public order is preserved without violence and without infringing fundamental rights,” the expert concluded.

The post The 35th protest in Albania: security expert warns of factors that could lead to escalation appeared first on Albeu.com.