After the Constitutional Court ruling, what did political parties declare?

The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Kosovo has unanimously ruled in the KO124/25 case, declaring the Parliament's decisions against refusing to form the Commission for secret voting and similar decisions of other constitutional sessions invalid.

According to the trial, the constitutional session of the Assembly, launched on April 15th 2025, has not ended, as the Speaker and deputy heads of the Parliament have not been elected, thus making the constitution invalid. The court has demanded that within 30 days of entering the verdict, MPs complete the process of choosing the Parliament's leadership and begin its full functioning.

This decision has prompted reactions by the main political parties in Kosovo.

AAK leader Ramush Haradinaj has said that:

“in a situation of a total blockade of the establishment of institutions of the Republic of Kosovo, including the Constitutional Court of Kosovo, an unprecedented case for the democratic world. We have done it, not for party interests, but for the country's interest and the implementation of the will expressed by vote in the February 2025 parliamentary elections. ”

MP PDK, Abelard Tahiri, through a post on social networks, has praised the act of prejudice as a victory for constitutional order and defeat of political blockades.

April 15th “, the constitution was initially blocked by the failure of the largest parliamentary group to elect their candidate for Parliamentary Speaker, and then, from April 30th, through the insistence of an unconstitutional proposal that prevented the follow-up of the constitutional session. ”

Chairman PDK, Memli Krasniqi, has stressed that:

The system session cannot be changed by default. No one has the right to impose secret voting without constitutional grounds and without regular procedure“.

He added that the PDK “acted responsibly, seriously and constructively,” by “refers to a solution, not to a deadlock “and seeking the respect of democratic order, not to push or deepen the institutional crisis. ”

We are pleased that the Constitutional Court ended this deliberate game of delays by the V coalition V-Gux-Alternatives, making it clear that they have no right to block the process and that the Assembly should be constitutionalised within 30 days,” Krasniqi said.

Vetevendosje Movement MP Iron Murati said:

The secret voting does not violate the Constitution, so it is allowed. It doesn't take 30 days to wait. Tomorrow it can be processed by secret voting, and it's done by”.

He mentioned three key points in the act.

The secret voting “is constitutional and Allowable; all parties should engage in the constitutionalised Assembly; all MPs are obliged to participate in the vote“.

Democratic League of Kosovo MP (LDK), Hykmete Bajrami, has welcomed the decision, but has voiced concern about the lack of clarity in the consequences of not implementing the 30-day deadline.

I'm glad the Constitutional Court has set a deadline and we already know, there's a deadline... It doesn't seem very clear, from what I've seen, what will happen if it doesn't take place within 30 days “.

She added that the irregularities remain big, especially considering the high number of continued Constituent sessions that have not produced results.

The Democratic League of Kosovo through a communique said:

The largest parliamentary group cannot block the constitution of” and it must reassure the majority of MPs or reach consensus with other parliamentary groups“.

Also, according to the LDK, the chairman of the constitutional session must abide by the constitutional provisions, Chapter IV of the Parliament's Labour Order and parliamentary practices, continuing the session with “openover” under the scenario previously agreed upon.

Intera, in the reaction of the Vetevendosje Movement, has stressed that the obligation to complete the constitution is the responsibility of all MPs, not only of the first parliamentary subject.

“Oposit aimed at blaming Movement V For not representing the House. However, the Constitutional Court's act sometimes stresses that the obligation is to all MPs from all parties, not just the first party”, is said in response.. /Periscopi/