Does the government in charge of Kosovo have legitimacy for dialogue with Serbia?

But the continuation of dialogue with the Serb side by the incumbent Albin Kurti is being rejected in Kosovo, where the Assembly has not yet completed the constitutional process, which would pave the way for the formation of the new executive.

The Democratic League of Kosovo (LDK) rejected the legitimacy of current chief negotiator, Besnik Bislimi, to engage in talks with Serbia after the meeting he held with Serbian counterpart Petar Petkovic on Tuesday, with the European Union's mediation (BE).

Even at the Kosovo Institute for Justice (IKD), they consider that the incumbent government has no legal mandate nor legitimate to continue dialogue with Serbia.

The constitutional [four-year-old] mandate of this government has ended on 22 March and, since then, it exercises only careary functions, limited to daily management of public affairs”, says Naim Jakaj from this organisation, in a conversation with Radio Free Europe (REL).

According to him, the incumbent government has neither the political support of the Parliament nor the mandate to take action that creates lasting consequences for the state, including international agreements of political or judicial nature.

“Dialog with Serbia is a process that requires high-level political decision making and full institutional responsibility that a government in office cannot meet, according to the Constitution and Law on Government”, Jakaj points out.

LDK and PDK object, EU silents

The LDK, through a communique, said any eventual agreement or commitment undertaken in this phase in dialogue with Serbia “will not produce obligations for Kosovo”.

LDK deputy MP and deputy leader Lutfi Haziri tells REL that, in the context of dialogue with Serbia, neither Bislim nor incumbent Kosovo Prime Minister Kurti, “have no mandate to decide for anything, until the new government vote”.

For the Democratic Party of Kosovo (PDK), Bislim's move to the trilateral meeting with Sorensen and Petkov was a futile “path”.

That meeting was probably some reason for the three parties that attended, that we were doing something. But, from those meetings, I don't think there will be any final results of”, the head of the group said. PDK, Memli Krasniqi, in front of journalists.

However, none of the parties have answered Radio Europe's free question about how and where they would legally contest any eventual reconciliation between Kosovo and Serbia for whatever, in the current phase.

The incumbent's deputy prime minister's office, Bislimi, has not responded to the REL's request to comment on the PDK and LDK's claims before sending this newstletter to the subscriptions' addresses Thursday, but Bislimi himself later, through a Facebook post, has responded to LDK charges.

There are no new agreements or obligations stemming from Brussels. They are only existing and must be implemented. A new agreement is not being negotiated in Brussels at this stage. We have the Basque Agreement for more than two years, but it has to be implemented”, he wrote.

“Mandati as deputy prime minister in office is the legitimate, democratic, constitutional and legal mandate to lead the pillars of European integration, development and dialogue” according to competencies, Bislimi has said.

Meanwhile, the EU has not responded to REL's interest in whether the current political situation in Kosovo constitutes, more specifically, the fact that the government is in charge, a challenge to continuing the dialogue process.

Government Restrictions in Action

But Jakaj from the IKD stresses that the EU, as a facilitator of dialogue, follows a pragmatic approach to preserve the continuation of the process and avoid diplomatic absence.

“even though it is aware of the limited status of the Government of Kosovo, The EU probably intends that with low-level or technical meetings, it will preserve some form of dialogue, without making decisions or reaching final agreement”, Jakaj says.

The European emissary for dialogue, Sorensen, has also called for a meeting with the top negotiators in July, while warning a high-level meeting without specifying when it could happen.

Jakaj considers that under current conditions, “is neither reasonable nor responsible to plan a high-level political meeting that would lead to new agreements”.

“Such a process would be unstable and could provoke constitutional crisis or internal delegation of dialogue”, Jakaj says.

The Government Law stipulates that a government in office cannot exceed its limited authorisations and clearly bans the undertaking of major decisions.

In this context, Jakaj stresses that neither chief negotiator Bislimi nor the government in office can legally agree or sign any agreements at this stage, within the context of the dialogue process with Serbia.

Any agreement signed by a government in office, he says, could be treated as legally invalid, “after being reached without full constitutional basis and outside the political mandate”. / REL/