The Democratic Party presented the points they disagree with regarding the current draft of the Justice Reform.
Eduard Halimi, Democratic Party MP, member of this Commission, said that the opopsition doesn’t condition the reform only with the majority. He said it isn’t even important if the laws will pass with 2/3rd or 3/5th of the votes. For the Democratic party, the reasons are others.
First of all, the Democrats do not agree with the existence and composition of the Council of Appointments.
Secondly, the opposition is against the institutional process for appointing officials in the justice system. They see the current scheme as very complicated, without controlling balances and without guaranteeing independence.
Thirdly, the DP opposes the structure of the Supreme Court, which is divided in two sub-categories, one for civilian and criminal cases, and one for the administrative court. The Democratic Party says that the structure of the Supreme Court is not up to experts, but to politics. As for this institution, the opposition is against the appointing of judges from outside the system. They see this as an issue that can be exploited politically.
Fourth, the Democratic Party does not agree with the interruption of mandates for constitutional institutions.
Fifth, the DP supports the process for vetting judges and prosecutors, but is against the fact that judges and prosecutors are not allowed to appeal the measures taken against them.
Sixth, the opposition has reserves about the appointing process and the functions of the Supreme Justice Inspectorate, saying that the 9-year mandate of the Supreme Inspector, who is appointed with 3/5th of the Parliament votes, makes this institution politicized and under the control of the majority.
Seventh, the DP is against the composition of the Disciplinary Tribunal. The opposition say that although it reflects the statements of the interim opinion, the members are in conditions of conflict of interest, and the DP sees this more as an opportunity to turn the system into a corporate, rather than having it under political control. The opposition say there is room for abuses.
Eighth, the DP does not agree with the formula for appointing judges of the Constitutional Court.
Ninth, the DP is against the inclusion of prosecutors and judges who have not ended the Magistrate School.
Tenth, the opposition does not agree with the way how five political members are appointed at the Supreme Council of the Prosecution and at the Supreme Judiciary Council.
After this presentation, Pandeli Majko from the DP accused the opposition of making games with the justice reform, and that they lack of the will to do it.
“There is no justice reform with these points that you mention. Who should we trust, the DP leader that comes out of your party, saying that the solution is the Venice Commission? Or you who have other 10 points However, I thank you for making it clear what you don’t agree with”, Majko declared.
The Socialist Movement for Integration was optimistic for a political consensus.
Top Channel
