24 minutes agoRTK director's choice fails, process returns to zero
Periskopi(4 years ago)
(4 years ago)The election of the new RTK director has failed. This has been made known through a communique for the media by the RTK board. It says that the reason for the failure of the director's election is the lack of clear legal base. So the process becomes the initial phase. Full communication: Lack of base [...]
This has been made known through a communique for the media by the RTK board.
It says that the reason for the failure of the director's election is the lack of clear legal base.
So the process becomes the initial phase.
Full communication:
Lack of clear legal base, Board of RTK restores RTK director's re-election process to zero
At the meeting, held on March 22, 2022, members of the RTK Board have voted against each candidate for the RTK director's position.
Such a result has come because of the lack of clear legal basis that would guarantee the outcome of the process. Consequently, to avoid legal violations, the Board of RTK has completed the competition process by not voting any candidate for General RTK, not prejudiced on the professionalism and vision of some candidates for the development of RTK.
Board RTK explains public opinion that historically during public competition procedures, RTK is referring to Labour and Social Management Ministry Administrative Guide. 07/2017 to regulate competition procedures in the public sector. The same Administrative Guide has been used in competitions for RTK preliminary directors. At the same time, RTK's legal office has recommended to the board that the same process can be followed even now, as RTK has no other legal document that it can use for the competition procedure for general directors.
In the course of the RTK General Directorial Competition procedure, the board has noted that the implementation of this instruction in this process is problematic because it envisions the general director general's selection procedure in dissolving with the RTK Law.
The guideline stipulates that only three (3) members can be on the assessment commission, and final assessment is submitted to the board for approval, meanwhile, the RTK Law clearly states that the Director of the Board RTK must be named 2/3 of the board members' votes, and clearly stipulates that board members should not be influenced by any party in their decision -- neither by such a commission of the three members. However, by implementing and respecting the Law for RTK, the board has decided that all members will be part of the evaluation commission. Such a practice has occurred in the past. But in view of this practice, the board has also encountered other legal abnormalities during the process.
In the same processes of past boards, all members have been on the assessment commission, and the same members have also been on the commission to investigate complaints. Having no other legal breakthrough, this for the current board is unacceptable because it is legal violation for the same commission to assess candidates and consider their eventual complaints. Hence, the Board considers this practice to have been and is at odds with the Law for RTK and Higher Administration Guide.
Moreover, in almost all steps, Administrative Guide is contrary to the RTK Law, and it is impossible to implement both documents in this competition fairly. And for the RTK Board it is priority to respect the RTK Law, despite its many shortcomings.
Given the basic goal of returning legitimacy to RTK and respecting current legislation, the board considers that there is no proper legal basis which would ensure the director's election in a fair manner and without controversial legal issues. Consequently, the board under no circumstances can choose the RTK director by not respecting legal procedures or clarifying them overall by avoiding any uncertainty and ensuring full transparency and legitimacy.
As a result of this process, the Board has not appointed any of the five candidates for the General Director of RTK, as such a appointment provided full procedural and legal clarity.
The board will immediately ask the management to create a task force to create a special regulation that will be in full accordance with the Law for RTK and within a timeline the more rational it will resurface the RTK General Director competition. The bill of this regulation will also be discussed with civil society and RTK trade unions.
Until the announcement of the competition and the appointment of the new director, Mr. Shkumibin Ahmetxekaj has full confidence of the board to continue exercising the task of the RTK General Director.
