The session of the Constitutional Court, similar to that of the Assembly of Kosovo

The hearing of the political contest between the coalition block LDK-AAK-NISMA, supported also by Vetevendosje Movement on one side and the Democratic Party of Kosovo (PDK) on the other, was held in almost the same manner as the Kosovo Assembly session held on 17 July.

Arsim Bajrami’s four requests to the Constitutional Court

Arsim Bajrami, Representative of the Democratic Party of Kosovo, accused in his testimony the former Speaker of Kosovo Assembly, Jakup Krasniqi, for committing three violations during the 17 July Assembly session.

Therefore, he said, PDK leader Hashim Thaçi rightfully left the constitutive session. Bajrami said that there were violations in both procedural and formal plans. He further explained what parliamentary groups represent and stressed that PDK is the biggest party therefore it has the right to nominate the Speaker of the Assembly.

Finally, he made four requests to the Constitutional Court: to proclaim the election of Assembly Speaker anti-constitutional, to state that PDK is the biggest party, to proclaim the 17 July session illegal and to give PDK the uncontested right to lead with the Assembly of Kosovo.

 Osmani: 17 July Assembly session was legal

Arguments of the representative of the coalition block, Vjosa Osmani, were in a complete contradiction from those made by Arsim Bajrami. She gave her opinion on what the parliamentary groups represent and mentioned parliamentary practices stressing that there is a major distinction between the parliamentary groups and parliamentary parties.

Osmani insisted that the Constitutional Court should not be dealing with the session which was held in accordance with Assembly regulation. The representative of the block quoted also the Venice Commission with regards to the work of the Assembly and stressed that legitimacy of the inaugural session of the Assembly was proved by the presence of the two thirds of the deputies.

Representative of the Vetevendosje Movement, Albulena Haxhiu, also brought arguments that the Constitutional Court does not have the right to consider the work of the Assembly since its work is regulated by the Assembly Regulation. Haxhiu also presented her arguments on creation of parliamentary groups based on the free mandate which is guaranteed by the Constitution.

Representative of the Alliance for the Future of Kosovo, Ardian Gjini, objected Arsim Bajrami’s concepts on parliamentary groups. Gjini requested from the Constitutional Court to give its opinion on who has the mandate at the Assembly: deputies or parties.

The second round of the session proceeded with Arsim Bajrami’s, who initially rejected all the other testimonies on creation of parliamentary groups. He continued with his claims that the constitutive session of the Assembly and election of the Assembly speaker were not legal. As an argument, he used stenographic data of former speakers and deputy speakers of the Assembly, on which group is considered a majority. According to him, PDK with 37 seats at the Assembly represents the majority.

Vjosa Osmani’s arguments were in a complete contradiction with those made by Bajram. She claimed that the coalition block makes the parliamentary majority. Albulena Haxhiu from Vetevendosje also supported this argument.

Further, the President of the Constitutional Court requested additional clarification from the deputies present at this session. Arsim Bajrami explained in theory the definition of a deputy and parliament and requested from the Court to defend the Constitution. Referring to the 17 July constitutive session of the Assembly, Bajrami said that the Assembly is not sovereign to come up will illegal decisions.

Vjosa Osmani also spoke during the second part of the session about deputies and parliament, rejecting Arsim Bajrami’s claims.   After hearing the testimonies of the deputies, Enver Hasani, President of the Constitutional Court, called the members of the panel for a special meeting, and proclaimed the session closed.

He informed that the decision of the Court will be sent to the parties later and the same will be also published on the web page of the Constitutional Court.