Next to Blerim Reka: Thinks the Constitutional Court made the final decision for LDK]

The next recipe is dedicated to the Constitutional Court, he is unaware of the difference between the Interim Mass and the final decision of the Constitutional Court.

The incumbent minister has named the Constitutional Court's Interim Mass as the final decision, saying the Court confirmed that no mandate can be given to the second party without first refusing, which falls a defeat from the latter.

Reka's own chief, Albin Kurti yesterday, announced the party militants and his staff not to be thrilled by this Interim Mass of the Constitutional Court, as the final decision has yet to be made.

But it seems that incumbent Minister Reka has not seen this and has decided to write a status that President Thaci has violated the Constitution and that the new government cannot be formed.

We remember that incumbent Minister Reka also made a scandalous statement saying Serbia should be left out on the Adriatic Sea via Kosovo and Albania, writes Metro newspaper.

Reka's Complete Posting:

Constitution is not a novel

The Constitutional Court confirmed what was widely known: political will cannot be created by violating the constitution. Just as a house does not rise on questionable foundations, nor does it form government with constitutional violations.

The court just confirmed that it cannot be granted mandated to the second party without first refusing. The constitution found no evidence that it had been rejected first! After all, the Constitutional Court does not write the constitution. She just appreciates if she gets violated.

The constitutional rate is not a novel, since literary critics are analysed with the question: “what did author” mean? It only applies what “the author” has written. No, as we understand, but as the constitutional code says. She does not interpret the constitution as she wants it, but only as the Constitutionary has written. And in the constitution, it doesn't write about how many days the first party should send the mandate's name. Only the Parliament can do that, with the change of this constitution, where it will set this deadline.

As long as there is no such deadline, the constitution has not been violated by the one who should have sent the name, but by the one who did not expect sending the mandate's name. It's more clear than that.