Justice Minister opposes the International Monitoring Operation for Judiciary Reform

But beyond promises and polite smiles, the debate is still undergoing. This time not with words, but through written documents which complicate the position between partners and government allies.

The Justice Minister, Petrit Vasili, has opposed the role of the International Monitoring Operation in the judiciary reform.

In a letter sent to the President, the Parliament Speaker, the Prime Minister, and to US and EU Ambassadors, the Justice Minister says that the monitoring board is not foreseen by any law of the Constitution, and it is not made by only judges and prosecutors.

According to the Justice Minister, all parties must go back to implement the Constitution, in order to guarantee the credibility of the vetting process, without political mediators between international observers and Albanian authorities.

The implementation of the judiciary reform will be even more difficult than predicted.

Top Channel has learned that the Chairman of the Commission of Laws, Fatmir Xhafaj, also former Chairman of the Judiciary Reform Commission, says that the establishing of the Justice Appointment Council is not based on the law.

Xhafaj too sent a letter this Monday, at the same time as the Justice Minister. His letter was sent to the President, the Parliament Speaker, the Prosecutor General, to the presidents of the Constitutional and Supreme Courts, and also to the Prosecutor General. In this letter he says that the process used by the Prosecution General and the High Council of Justice for selecting these lists goes against the Constitution.

“This means that the result is also against the constitution”, Xhafaj said, adding that there has been a double standard procedure.

This stance is the opposite of what of the Parliament Speaker, Ilir Meta, held by publicly defending the procedure followed by the Prosecutor General, when he was being accused by the US Ambassador.

However, according to Fatmir Xhafaj, ignoring this fact would damage the citizens’ trust in the process for building new judiciary institutions. It also compromises the sincerity of public and institutional factors and of their declarations in favor of the judiciary reform.

Top Channel