The Constitutional Court states: The Choice of Nenad Rashih anti-unconstitutional

Through a media report, the Court has indicated that the Serbian deputy leader's position belongs to the parliamentary group mostly MPs from the communities.

“In the context of the procedure for selecting the deputy leader from the ranks of deputies who are not majority, the Action underscores that the right of the proposal, as defined by the Parliament's rule and in the letter and spirit of the Constitution, confirmed even in the court practice of the Court, belongs to the majority or the greatest number of MPs from the ranks of non-communal deputies, elected under the 1st and 2th paragraph 2 of Article 2 [The Framework of the Constitution], who enjoy the most legitimate democratic community within the relevant communities. The indictment points out that this standard is of crucial importance to constitutional protection of community rights that are not a majority even in the sense of the demands of Article 7 of Article 58 [The state's] responsibility of the Constitution, because it is the responsibility of the majority to ensure effective representation of communities that are not majority in the state institutions of the Republic of Kosovo, responsible for the Assembly's headship. At the same time, it is the responsibility of communities that are not the majority, in realising constitutional rights, to be brought in line with the constitutional and legal requirements of the Republic of Kosovo”, the Constitutional Court has said.

Also, the bias is said to come in terms of only exclusion, and for the purpose for which the candidate/same vote can only be realised as many as 3 times for the same candidate, and the lots procedure should come in only under the exclusive circumstances and for the purpose for which they have been designated, respectively, in the function of the framework of the Parliament, given the set time deadlines in the constitution, so that the legislative body can become functional within the 30 (30s) deadlines), as defined with the paragraph 1st of the constitution [ZEC 66th and the Constitution].

“In the application of higher principles under concrete circumstances, the Court, as it has clarified in Aktagence, concluded that the majority of deputies from the ranks of Serb community deputies has seized the right to propose for deputy speaker of the Parliament, respectively, members of the Parliament's Headship, proposing 9 (nine) candidates. As a result, Mr. Deputy Election. Nenad Rašiić in the position of deputy head of the Parliament has not come as a proposal from most MPs from the Serb community ranks, as well as there has been no refusal to exploit this right by the majority of MPs from among the Serb community. Consequently, the Court found that, under the concrete circumstances of the de-blocking mechanisms, no one had been used in accordance with the spirit and purpose for which” was envisioned, it is said among other things in the indictment.

Full Notification

The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Kosovo, on January 28, 2026, has ruled in the case of KO325/25, in terms of assessing the constitutionality of “Procesverbals from the Kosovo Assembly session”, held on October 10th 2025, set forth by Igor Simic and 9 (nine) other deputies of the Republic of Kosovo, based on November 5th paragraph 113 [Jurisdiction and Authorised Pals] of the Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo.

The court has decided: (i) to declare, with 6 (six) votes per (one) against, acceptable demand; (ii) to state, by 5 (five) votes per and 2 (two) against, that the verdict [r.09-071] of the Republic of Kosovo's October 10th 2025 Assembly for the election of the deputy head of the Parliament from the ranks of Serb community deputies is not in line with Article 4 of Article 67 [The Election of Chairman and Vice Presidents] of the Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo in connection with Article 1 subparagraph 1 and paragraph 7 of Article 12 (the election of the Parliament's Vice-Presidents) of the Republic of Kosovo Parliament; (ii) to decide, by 5 (five) votes for and 2 (two) against that, based on the principle of judicial security, the bias in the concrete circumstances has no reform; and (iv) to reject, unanimously, the demand for temporary measures.

The indictment initially explains that pre-tellers of the request opposed “procesverbals from the Kosovo Assembly session”, held on October 10th 2025, for which they claimed to contradict Article 4 [The Constitution's Office and Vice Presidents] of the Constitution, chapter 1 of Article 6 [The Parliament's Vice-Presidents of the Parliament], as well as the trial practice of the Court, including the Court Act in the June/2625 case. In addition, the applicant demanded by the Court to impose temporary measures.

In this context, the Court stressed that following its entry into force in the case of KO265/25, on October 10th 2025, the Convention Constitutive Assembly, launched on April 15, 2025, for the election of the last deputy head of the Assembly, allegedly vice president of the Serb community's ranks. The Speaker-elect of the Assembly invited the majority MP from the Serb community's ranks to submit in writing, and literally the candidate or candidate for deputy chairman of the Kosovo Republic of Kosovo Assembly, where he nominated MP Slavko Simic. Since the vote failed for 3 (tri) consecutively for the proposed candidate, because the same did not get the votes needed to be elected under the head of the Parliament, the procedure of proposal and voting for 3 (tri) was repeated for 8 (eight) more MPs proposed by most MPs from the Serb community ranks, those that failed in each case. On the same day, the elected Speaker of the Parliament asked the majority of MPs from the Serb community's ranks to propose the next displaced MP to that point from the Serb community's ranks, respectively, MP Nenad Racevic. However, as a result of refusing to propose the same from the majority of Serb community deputies' turn, the elected chairman of the Parliament estimated that the deputies of this community were “refused” to propose a displaced candidate until those moments, so he went on with the procedure of lots defined in paragraph 7 of Article 12 of the Parliament, with the crérast, found that there was only one candidate left without being voted 3 (tri) consecutively and cast in his name. MP Nenad Rašiić received 71 (Seventy-one) votes per, 9 (nine) against and 24 (one-fourth) abstentions. In this case, the Speaker-elect of the Parliament found that the last deputy head of the Assembly, deputy head of the Serb community, had also been elected, respectively, and closed the Parliament Constituent Seanca, which had begun on April 15th 2025.

On the merits of the motion, the Court found that the subject of the assessment in this case is the question of whether the procedure for electing MP Nenad Rašiić as deputy head of the Parliament by the ranks of Serb community deputies, through the decision [N.09-071] of the Assembly of October 10th 2025, is in conflict with Article 4th paragraph 67 [the election of the chairman and vice-presidents] of the Constitution regarding the 1st paragraph 1 and paragraph 7th November 12th 12th. (Charge of the Vice Speakers of the Parliament's Rules.

Referring to the general principles stemming from the Constitution and Elevation of the Assembly, which are defined in the court's judicial practice, which are relevant in the circumstances of the concrete case, results in that (i) the Kosovo Assembly from its ranks elects mayor and 5 (five) vice-presidents, who form the Headship of the Parliament; (ii) 3 (three) vice-chairpersons proposed by 3 (tri) the largest parliamentary groups; and 2 (two) vice-presidents represent communities that are not majority in the country, the Serb community and other communities respectively; and (as a majority) as candidates and mayors for the mayoral and mayoral votess of the majority, KO.

In the context of the procedure for selecting the deputy chairman from the ranks of non-combatant deputies, the Act underlines that the right to the proposal, as defined in the rule of the Parliament and in the spirit of the Constitution, confirmed even in the court's judicial practice, belongs to the majority or the largest number of MPs from the ranks of communities that are not majority, selected under subgraphers 1 and 2 of paragraph 2 of Article 64 [The Framework of the Constitution], which enjoy the greatest legitimacy within the respective communities. The indictment points out that this standard is of crucial importance to constitutional protection of community rights that are not a majority even in the sense of the demands of Article 7 of Article 58 [The state's] responsibility of the Constitution, because it is the responsibility of the majority to ensure effective representation of communities that are not majority in the state institutions of the Republic of Kosovo, responsible for the Assembly's headship. At the same time, it is the responsibility of communities that are not the majority, in realising constitutional rights, to be brought in line with the constitutional and legal requirements of the Republic of Kosovo.

The ruling further explains that the demarcation mechanisms, including (i) that the vote for the candidate/ same could only be realised up to 3 (three) for the same candidate; and (ii) the lots procedure, should come into expression only under the exception circumstances and for the purpose for which they are defined, respectively, in the function of the constitution's constitution, given the deadlines set out in the constitution, so that the legislature becomes functional within the 30 (tured) term, as defined by paragraph 1st and 66th).

As it has been declared in the Act of Justice, the implementation of these mechanisms in a way that would enable most of the Parliament's deputies to determine the representative of a community that is not a majority, without the proposal of deputies of that community, in essence, would constitute the bypass of formal guarantees set out in the Parliament Rule. That is because, the candidate's proposal for deputy chairmans from among the communities that are not the majority is the right of most of those communities.

This principle is particularly important in view of representation of communities that are not the majority, who do not have the votes needed to ensure the election of their representatives in the Parliament's Headship.

In applying higher principles in the concrete circumstances, the Court, as clarified in Aktagence, concluded that the majority of deputies from the Serb community's ranks has exploited the right of the proposal for deputy head of the Parliament, respectively, members of the Parliament's Headship, proposing 9 (nine) candidates. As a result, Mr. Deputy Election. Nenad Rašiić in the position of deputy head of the Parliament has not come as a proposal from most MPs from the Serb community ranks, as well as there has been no refusal to exploit this right by the majority of MPs from among the Serb community. Consequently, the Court found that, in the circumstances of concrete cases, de-mandatory mechanisms, they were not used in accordance with the spirit and purpose for which they were envisioned.

The court in the end explains that, based on the principle of judicial security, this Act on concrete circumstances has no reverse effect.

We remember, that on October 10th, Nenad Rasiqi was elected deputy head of the Kosovo Parliament. He in the first round had managed to secure 71 votes.

“71 votes per, 9 against, 24 abstentions”, Basha had said, consisting of the Assembly as a constitutional one.

Rashiqi was elected with the votes of the Democratic League of Kosovo (LDK) and Vetevendosje Movement ( LVV). /Periscopi

Nenad Rassic elects deputy head of Kosovo Parliament by Serb community