Kosovo’s MPs are expected to convene on Wednesday, September 9, to continue the constitutive session, in another important moment for political developments in the country.

The session, which remained unfinished during the previous month, is scheduled to begin at 11:00 a.m. Completing the constitution of the Assembly would create the possibility of beginning the process of forming the country’s new institutions.

However, in addition to concluding parliamentary procedures, attention is also expected to focus on the next step: the election of the president of the Republic.

It is still unclear whether a possible agreement between LVV and LDK would produce the numbers needed to unblock the situation and fully operationalize the institutions.

The Democratic Party of Kosovo and the Democratic League of Kosovo are also expected to participate in the September 9 session, as they will be part of the process of constituting the Assembly.

Drenori: Three scenarios are possible for Wednesday’s session

Political analyst Xhavit Drenori has outlined three possibilities for how Wednesday’s session could unfold.

According to him, the first option is for LVV not to move forward with the constitution of the institutions if it does not secure an agreement on the president. The second scenario envisages continuing with the constitution of the Assembly and forming the government, giving LVV time to negotiate a solution. The third possibility involves reaching an agreement between the parties, which would pave the way for the election of the president.

Drenori believes that the first two alternatives are more likely to materialize, while an immediate agreement between the political entities remains less likely.

“Three scenarios may emerge during Wednesday’s session. The first concerns the possibility that the Vetëvendosje Movement will announce that it has not reached an agreement with any political entity. Since failure to elect the president would lead the country toward elections, LVV could seek to suspend the steps for constituting the institutions, including forming the government, and use the parliamentary space to find another solution.

Another possibility is that, even without an agreement with the other parties, the constitution of the Assembly would continue, followed by the formation of the government. This would give LVV the time and space to try to reach an agreement on electing the president during the next two months.

The third scenario would be reaching an agreement between the political entities, through which the procedure for electing the president could begin. I assess this possibility as less likely. For this reason, the first two scenarios appear more realistic for Wednesday’s session,” Drenori explained to Bota sot.

Makolli criticizes VV over the institutional vacuum

Political analyst Vesel Makolli described as paradoxical the situation in which an entity that has won three consecutive elections, two of them with more than 50% of the vote, has left the country without functioning institutions for nearly two years.

“Winning three consecutive elections, particularly the last two with more than 50% of the vote, should have translated into the creation of institutions. The fact that the country has been left in an institutional vacuum for nearly two years constitutes a political paradox that requires a much deeper assessment than an ordinary analysis.

This is also the responsibility for which Kosovo’s electorate gave its trust and, in the fullest sense, obligated the winning entity. It is not enough to attribute responsibility to the opposition, the system, circumstances or institutional blockades.

A leader who wins three times in a row and receives such substantial electoral support has an extraordinary responsibility to turn that mandate into functioning institutions. Political success is not measured only by the votes received on election day, but also by the ability to turn that trust into governance, stability, institutions and results,” Makolli told Bota sot.

According to Makolli, Avni Dehari, in his capacity as the convener of the constitutive session, has authority only to preside over that session. He considers the postponement of the meeting and the use of constitutional deadlines to be a political action in line with the interests of Dehari’s party.

“The person who called the Assembly meeting for September 9 is a deputy like all the others. Based on his age, the Assembly’s Rules of Procedure assign him only the task of calling and presiding over the constitutive meeting. Beyond this function, he has no special duties or powers.

Consequently, the postponement or delaying of the meeting and the use of all constitutional deadlines by Avni Dehari cannot be viewed solely as a procedural issue. This is a political action which, based on developments so far, appears to have been undertaken in accordance with the political decision and interests of his party.

The opposition has the right, normally and democratically, to oppose the government, demand new elections, refuse to vote for the government and use all the political and parliamentary means permitted by the Constitution and democracy,” he said.

Makolli stressed that primary responsibility for creating the institutions lies with the force that emerged victorious in the elections.

He assessed that extending the constitutional deadlines could be part of a political strategy aimed at shifting responsibility for the crisis and the possibility of holding new elections onto the opposition.

“Primary responsibility for forming the institutions falls on the entity that won the elections and sought the mandate to lead the country. This logic cannot be reversed by placing the main burden for the institutional vacuum on the opposition, when the election winner, with more than 50% of the vote, had the numbers and the mandate to create the institutions.

VV was not prepared from the outset to seek a political compromise and form the state institutions, because of the obligations arising from international agreements and the decisions that must be implemented.

In these circumstances, failure to respect the constitutional deadlines may be part of a calculated strategy. It could serve as bait for the opposition, so that after the constitution of the Assembly and the election of the government on September 9, it would turn to the Constitutional Court over the violation of the deadlines.

VV’s political goal would be to create a situation in which responsibility for prolonging the institutional crisis and for a new cycle of parliamentary elections would be attributed to the opposition. In other words, this is not merely a procedural deadlock, but a genuine political calculation,” he concluded.

The post September 9: A decisive day for Kosovo’s institutions, with three political scenarios on the table appeared first on Albeu.com.

As the certification of the results and the start of official contacts between political parties are awaited, the signals emerging suggest that negotiations will not be easy.

In this situation, one of the main questions is how much internal divisions could affect the parties’ ability to reach an agreement on forming the institutions.

It was precisely on this topic that Professor Enver Bytyçi spoke to “Bota sot,” saying that the unification of the political scene in Kosovo is, unfortunately, a “mission impossible.”

According to him, the opposition parties have lined up as a bloc and are obstructing the winner of three electoral processes, solely because of ego and personal grudges.

“The unification of Albanian politics in general, and the unification of politics in Kosovo as well, appears to be a mission impossible. Historically, those who govern seek unification in order to create support for their governance, their program and their projects. Regardless of the fact that the projects, such as in Albania, involve the plundering of territory and national wealth. The opposition turns into a bloc, for example in Kosovo, to prove to those in power that ‘they cannot govern without the opposition’! If there have been three parliamentary elections, they have happened because of the ego of politics, in order to ‘prove’ to the winner that he cannot govern Kosovo alone. So, to demonstrate strength, ego and spite!

“Only among Albanians does it happen that when someone wins, resentment toward them increases. Meanwhile, in practical terms, when someone is strong in Albania, they are respected, the way is cleared for them with submission, and so on. Everywhere in the democratic world, dignity and integrity are demonstrated through work, results, achievements and trust. But in an agreement and coalition with the majority of Albanians, this integrity and this dignity seem to have taken another direction. There are many tendencies for this to be demonstrated through force, obscurantism, boycott and the blocking of the formation of institutions,” the professor said.

Bytyçi further commented on Kusari-Lila’s statement regarding the possibility of a coalition or compromise between LVV and the opposition.

In his analysis, he spoke about the scenarios that may await the country in the coming days, the progress of the creation of the institutions, and the election of the president. He also emphasized the need for the president of the state to be a non-partisan and unifying figure.

“Now let us come to the statement by Mimoza Kusari-Lila, who noted that a possible coalition or agreement between the winner (Vetëvendosje) and the losers (the opposition) after the June 7 elections is almost impossible because of the existence of radical groups within the opposition parties. This picture seriously endangers the formation of the institutions, that is, the election of the head of state in Kosovo, for which consensus between the majority and the opposition is needed. The results of June 7 show that the sovereign agrees that Albin Kurti should govern, but does not agree that he should also have the head of state as the ‘property’ of the winning party. So, the sovereign once again voted for compromise, just as in the December 28, 2025 elections. What is expected to happen? How can this difficult situation be overcome? How should the political parties behave? These questions are difficult to answer.

“But if valid advice had to be given, then I would say that the opposition should determine the president. But not through political bargaining, by favoring one or two candidacies. Not according to the formula that the name I have is the chairman or deputy chairman of the party that accepts the compromise and no one else. This is diktat, and if the head of state is determined on the basis of these principles, then he is compromised and one-sided from the moment he is accepted as a candidate, even before being elected president of the country. I do not believe in such solutions, because instead of strengthening the institution of the president, they damage it and turn that person either into a radical opponent of the government and parliament, or into a mannequin in the hands of the opposition. This risks damaging this institution. Kosovo does not need such a president, just as it does not need a puppet president who merely satisfies the appetites of the head of the majority. The president must be impartial, objective, clear in his decisions, and steady and consistent in his positions. Otherwise, the institutional role and balance are lost, which causes incalculable damage to the state and the future of Kosovo.”

According to the professor, the only way out of this situation is for the opposition to come forward with several names, which would then be reviewed in the Assembly before proceeding to a vote.

“Under these conditions there is only one solution: The opposition as a whole, or one of the two major opposition parties, should put forward many candidacies, at least four or five, and on this basis discuss with the majority which of them meets the basic criterion of preserving the balance between the institutions of the state, and it is precisely for that candidate that parliament should vote. There are enough such candidates in the ranks or among the supporters of the opposition, or of one of the two major opposition parties.”

In the end, he called on the political parties to avoid a black stain on their history and choose compromise, without pushing the state toward boycott.

“Internal divisions, as well as those between the opposition and the majority, must be avoided. Whoever clings to ego and personal interests in order to damage the state and the Republic will bear historical responsibility. The majority and the opposition should spare themselves the black stain in their political history of boycotting the state, for which tons of Albanian blood have been shed! Any political figure who places his interest above the interest of the state and of Kosovo is destined to fail and be covered in shame. This does not happen anywhere in the world. It does not happen even in states that are internationally recognized. If it happens in Kosovo, which is an independent republic not fully recognized and not a member of the UN, the damage caused to it is many times greater than in UN member states. It is a signal of the devaluation of independence and statehood. Those who have fought with their minds or with weapons for the freedom and state of Kosovo cannot allow themselves to call into question the present fate and the future of the state! Otherwise, we will have to say that these politicians are false patriots!” Enver Bytyçi concluded for “Bota sot”.

The post “Mission Impossible”, professor warns of crisis and explains coalition scenarios appeared first on Albeu.com.