The race given to Pacolli to be president has no constitutional value

Coalition Agreement Point PAN and AKR, in which the president of the latter, Behgjet Pacolli, is guaranteed the post of president after the current president's mandate, Hashim Thaci, has no constitutional impact or value. In an exclusive interview for Periscope, former Constitutional Court Chairman Enver Hasani has spoken of the possibility that Pacolli would again lead the post of first state from which he was forced to give up in March 2011, as members of the Constitutional Court with majority votes had decided Pacolli's election was unconstitutional.

For Periscope, Hasani has also spoken on charges he had made to Pacolli in 2011, that he had offered a million euros to influence the decision, which removed him from the presidential post. It was initially known that Pacolli had filed civil charges against these Hasan charges, while the latter countered him with contempt, while expressing his full conviction that he will win the case.

For many the ruling that the Constitutional Court had made in 2014 after the six-month crisis was one of the main causes of the current political blockade in Kosovo, three years after the decision. Already when almost three months have passed from holding the Parliamentary Elections in Kosovo, it has not yet become the framework of the Assembly or the formation of the Government. In the interview for Periscope, Hasani indicated that the Constitutional Court's decisions can be changed only by constitutional amendments. While at the current level, the Court can only make the interpretation of existing constitutional standards.

The former head of the Constitutional Court explains that the Court for the 2014 verdict had started by defining who is the winner of the loser, according to the will of the sovereign vote, which is seen by the electoral Commission's list with which the national election results are announced.

According to him, this in no way means that those who have the pre-emptive of the Kosovo Parliament Speaker's proposal have the right to sabotage his constitutional sessions and the less to impose an absolute majority vote.

Exactly for Periscope he indicated that he was insulted and offended because of the Court's decision, a draft of which one of his colleagues had sent him to one of Hashim Thaci's deputy ministers.

During the interview, Hasan also spoke of pre-election coalition, one of them coalition PAN. The “Navy have believed that by making pre-election coalitions, they will achieve over 50 percent and only make Government. It's not like that. The more pre-election coalitions become, the more party votes of those who make coalitions” fall, Hasani said.

During the interview, he indicated that he would never again enter positions that are under the hierarchy of positions that he says had dignified them despite threats of madness he claims were fabricated against him.

It was Ramush's low lynx with Ardian Djind with that dirty video, which they pulled out at “Youtube” the next day that Issa's coalition with Hashim was made, probably showing the lowest blow anyone has ever done on the Kosovo public scene and beyond. Then, when favourable opinion was created to hit me even more, Hashimi led this madness further by trading his officials to the State Prosecutor to accuse me formally. Why? With the only reason to get me out of Kosovo public life”, Hasani reports among other things about Periscope.

Interviewed: Artina Muchiqi

Periscope: AKR chairman Behgjet Pacolli was fired from the presidential post because of constitutional violations. While, at one of the points of coalition agreement PAN and AKR are said to have again been promised the post of president. Legally, is it possible for Pacolli, who has committed constitutional violations, to be appointed to this position?

HasanBehgjet was never fired from the presidential post for reasons you say. The Constitutional Court has annulled a decision by the Kosovo Assembly, with which it is elected president of Kosovo. This annulment has occurred because the Kosovo Assembly violated the Constitution on the occasion of its election to president.

Similar to this agreement yesterday in the middle of PAN and AKR, which predicts that Behgjet will be president after Hashim, was also the case of Atifeta: in the two cases there is a political agreement between certain political forces which predicts that “oftec” will become president in “filan the day and the solian times”. In Atifta's case, the Court has stressed that the political agreement has no significance and that the constitutional provisions are the ones that carry weight, never the political agreements. In the case of Jahjaga, as it is known, the Court has said she has taken the oath of president of Kosovo for the five-year period and no influence in the middle can have agreement between political parties to eliminate Atifete Jahjaga from the post of president of Kosovo. The same is true today: no influence and no constitutional value has yesterday's agreement that says Behgjet will become Kosovo president after Hashim.

Periscope: On a TV show you said Behgjet Pacolli through his people, in 2011 he offered you a million euros to influence the decision, which he removed from the presidential post? Do you still support those claims, Pacolli at the beginning of this year has made a condemnation of slander?

Hasan: What I've been saying on that TV show is 100 percent accurate: on behalf of Behget certain people have offered me one million euros flat. I don't know if he's filed a civil suit, but I know for myself exactly that I've filed a lawsuit against him for offenses, and I'm sure that whenever it comes to the agenda to decide according to that lawsuit, I will win the case.

Periscope: The political blockade in Kosovo that we are experiencing is attributed to the 2014 Constitutional Court's decision issued after the six-month political crisis of the time? Could the decision be changed? What would be the procedure in such a case?

Hasan: There is an international standard in constitutional court, under which any Constitutional Court decision can be changed only by constitutional amendments. This can always be done with assumption that the new amendment does not conflict with constitutional provisions. Otherwise it can't be done. That's also true of your question.

Those who say the Court's decision was responsible for the four-month crisis in 2014 are mainly from the secular community. That's perfectly normal because the rules of every profession are special rules and non-seculars. Every normal lawyer, meanwhile, knows that constitutional courts worldwide do not create new constitutional standards, but only make the interpretation of existing constitutional standards. The same applies to Kosovo: Kosovo's constitution makes it clear that the Constitutional Court is an interpreter, not a creator of constitutional norms. This standard exists throughout the civilized world where there are constitutional courts. After all, constitutional justice is the judiciary for interpretation of the Constitution, and not of the law, of religious texts, of customary codes, etc. Constitutional interpretation represents a process consisting of building and clarifying the meaning of the existing constitutional rate. Every Constitutional Court is responsible for this. Other interpretations by the mayors of some of the justice community are nothing but the exercise of professional ignorance. According to these law partners, the Constitutional Court should stand ready and smart every time it has national elections in Kosovo and go through every local cafe or restaurant in Kosovo to find out where the politicians stand and ask them what they think is the biggest parliamentary group after the elections, so there is still no Parliament because it has not yet happened.

Periscope: The cause of that decision (the Constitutional Court), today we have a political situation where the two most voted parties in the country -- VV and LDK -- seem to remain in opposition? Juridically may be correct, but is the country politically being dealt with a big damage? How do you think we can get out of this situation that we're trapped in?

Hasan: I told you, the Constitution needs to be changed. There is no other solution because the Constitutional Court cannot create a new rate. The constitution gives the Court the right to interpret it, by no means the right to create new constitutional norms. And the new rates are well known, only through new constitutional amendments. No constitutional court, nowhere in the world where they exist, has the right to create new constitutional standards: they have mandated to interpret constitutional norms, not to create new norms. In the case of 2014, the Constitutional Court has interpreted the rating through another law rating, which we describe as the reference rate, or, as Italians are considered the best for interpretation of constitutional norms, the intermediate sovereign rate. In this case, as the sovereign's intermediate rate has been the Law for Elections. Every law is supposed to be constitutional until the opposite is confirmed. The court has initiated from this assumption in 2014: therefore, it has defined who is the winner and who is the loser according to what determines the intermediate nor reference rate of a law, the Law for Choice, which is supposed to be constitutional today. Who in which parliamentary group will be, can be legally known only after the constitution is introduced. Earlier, there is neither a nation nor a parliamentary group: there are only winners and losers according to the will of the sovereign vote, which is seen from the Electoral Commission list with which the results of the national elections are announced. This is the Constitution of Kosovo. In other countries are completely different constitutional rules, but the Kosovo Court interprets the Kosovo Constitution.

That in no way means that those who have pre-empted the Kosovo Assembly Speaker's proposal have the right to sabotage his constitutional sessions, much less to impose the vote on the absolute majority. That depends on the will of each MP. The Court has made this clear in 2014: Those who then said that Article 127 of the Act (wrongly referred to as articles of Action) gives MPs the right to find their own elections, today they are the beneficiaries of power. It's because of that act. They have to keep this principle today when they don't get along because the bias hasn't changed yet, it's the same. This job, however, now belongs to the past and I think Kosovo has taken advantage of that decision because all sick ambitions for the power of some have been acquired. This is of great importance because the Constitution has won, not the sick passions for power. VV and others will benefit tomorrow, just as those who denied the decision in 2014 (without any right).

I have been reviled and identified with that decision because, unfortunately, one of the colleagues at the Court has sent the draft of that plea to one of Hashim Thaci's deputy ministers to take their stand, even if he has voted in favour of that draft. I heard that later. Only one judge has been against the verdict, one of three international judges. He has given his non-recognitional opinion that generally coincides with the secular arguments of the Kosovo cocoons and restaurants of those days, without any constitutional legal arguments or quotes any constitutional authority of any serious Western country.

I am wrong, but I think even this legislature will not change this constitutional arrangement. This is scientifically explained with the doctrine of the so-called “zero sum gamma”, which in Albanian has trouble translating. I can only say that in a way that's disproportionate. This doctrine means that the loss of one side represents victory for the other, where there are losers and winners respectively, he takes it all. This constitutional provision in Kosovo has been introduced by the Ahtisaari Plan. There are people who in Kosovo sometimes appear to be “the Constitution's hard-to-do”, or that they know where the time processions are, how long the draft draft of the Constitution has lasted. They are liars! Procesverbals, or “travaux preparaguroniers<5> (preparative works) do not exist, nor have they ever existed, whereas provisions for the electoral system are literally carried by the Ahtisaari Plan in the Kosovo Constitution. In this plan, as it is known, the Kosovar side didn't even write a letter.

Under this electoral system, no one can come out first with an absolute majority in any way. Why? Because voting is effective for 100 seats. The Nazis have believed that by making pre-election coalitions they will achieve over 50 percent and only make government. It's not like that. The more pre-election coalitions take place, the more party votes of those who make coalitions drop down: it's like seawater, the more you drink, the more thirsty you get. That is why this cannot change easily, because all are potentially winners before the start of the vote.

Without consensus, the Constitution cannot be changed. I expect, from what I said earlier, that the VV will not give consent to changing the current electoral system because I know that in other elections, it can take all amicably with a very small ally. Why, then, should this constitutional standard be changed? It was found, those who have created this constitutional standard and this electoral system have clearly known that this system contributes greatly to the development of democratic processes in the country because no one allows anyone to be safe at any stage in its political legitimacy, respectively, that it allows anyone and at any time to feel superior to other political forces and confident that in other elections it can ultimately reverse the other person with the help of a very small and insignificant ally.

Periscope: You've had important political positions in the past, where are you currently engaged?

Hasan: No. I never intend to enter the posts that are under the hierarchy of the positions that I had: as you know, I've had the highest civilian positions in the country and held them with dignity and professional pride in spite of the threats of madness they've devised against me. That low plebe of Ramush with Ardian Djind with that dirty video, which they pulled out in the <x0-jube” the next day that became Issa's coalition with Hashim, probably represents the lowest blow anyone has ever done on the Kosovo public scene and beyond. Then, when favourable opinion was created to hit me even more, Hashimi led this madness further by trading his officials to the State Prosecutor to accuse me formally. Why? With the only reason to get me out of Kosovo public life. I've got a lot to say and I'll tell you very soon in times to come and it'll be shocking to some people. For now, that's enough.

I'm currently working, for two years, in two books: one for the Competitive Constitutional Court of Practice by international public law. I believe that in two more years of intensive labor they will be ready for the reader.