“Democracy at risk” /AAK's Faithful Tahiri tells of a government law passed

According to him, this law has been adopted by the Government of Kosovo without any public consultation and no European Union suggestions have been taken.

“Today, the Kosovo government adopted the Law for Public Officials in Electronic Meetings. This Law was adopted without a day of public consultation, without involvement and any recommendation of public officials themselves, and without addressing EU suggestions. Today, by this law, the state administration is being politically seized”, Tahiri has said.

Full announcement:

The following points are just some of the fundamental problems:

1. Lack of consulting with infected parties, which are public officials. This made the bill without the necessary legitimacy;

2. The bill goes against the Constitutional Court's act, envisioning that officials who have been appointed to lower and medium-level management positions be deprived of legal rights acquired under the law that was in force when appointed. The new bill, giving itself a retroactive effect, violates the acquired legal right of this category. All this is clearly contrary to the principles of IGMA and the EU, as an obligation Kosovo has dealt with the SAA, to do in co-ordination with the EU, which they are not doing;

3. This bill violates human rights, as it is based on unconfirmed assumption that civil servants are not worth it and that they have to leave mass work to bring obedient persons to those positions of government policy. It is simply a step in apprehending the state administration, along with the steps this government has taken in apprehending the state;

4. Leaving the Law's scope for public officials in a deliberate and groundless manner (that also applies to civil servants with special status);

5. The duration of the term up to two years for task seekers, the clear tendency for legalising this dangerous phenomenon;

6. Removing the minimum threshold, which at least two candidates must meet conditions for the high level of leadership, is wrong and with consequences in implementation in practice;

7. Determining the agreement for acceptance of civil servants, which is excessive according to Article 3 on Article 67, is very dangerous and may deliberately come to situations that the institutions do not accept officials and the same will leave the civil service (see Article 5 paragraph 67);

8. Unreasonable and contrary to the principle of presuming innocence;

9. Returning the mandate to current civil servants in the lower and medium category contrary to bias, cases: no. CO216/22 and KO220/22, under which mandates can only be applied to new officials who create working relationships after law enforcement.

10. Tragic this capture of the state and the need to protect it from politicising partisanisation in the Constitutional Court again.