Was the constitution violated at the constitutional session?

All of what happened at today's constitutional hearing explains the connoisseur of constitutional matters, Mazumum Baraliu. He has even talked about the LDK initiative to seek clarification by the Constitutional Court about the legality of coalition actions PAN, who is boycotting this session. Regarding the constitutional session held in [...]
All of what happened at today's constitutional hearing explains the connoisseur of constitutional matters, Mazumum Baraliu. He has even talked about the LDK initiative to seek clarification by the Constitutional Court about the legality of coalition actions PAN, who is boycotting this session.
Regarding the constitutional session held in absence of coalition PAN, which is considering that the constitution has been violated, has even commented on Constitution connoisseur Baraliu.
He says that since no decision has been made in this session, there can be no constitutional violations.
He even said the blame and responsible for this procrastination of institutions is PAN itself.
While in terms of the deadline for forming institutions, Baraliu says there is no date set as a result of the constitution's own shortcomings.
“As a consequence of the shortcomings that the Constitution has in force , this issue of elections and the proposal of the Kosovo Parliament is not defined by the Constitution, this very constitutional vacuum is being used, abuse with it several political segments by pushing and dragging this process, which has theoretical and doctrinal possibilities that until the constitutional session ends, the mayor and vice-presidents.
Baraliu even said the LDK initiative to address the constitutional court to explain what is happening in the assembly is fully right and constitutional.
“has the right to address the Constitutional Court with explanation for what is happening to the election of the mayor under law 67 paragraphs 2. ”
In this initiative towards constitutional court Baraliu, he said he would also have to explain the disrepute law in the 2014 decision, which gives the president the right to decide to whom the mandate to form the government.












