Meta’s trial is postponed again, the next hearing on Monday

The decision was made to give the President’s representatives 48 hours to answer the judges’ questions.

During the second session, four members out of seven presented to the representatives of the Presidency, Bledar Dervishaj and Katerina Treska, some questions of interest to the process.

After the questions posed by the judges of the Constitutional Court, the legal advisor of the President, Bledar Dervishaj asked for 48 hours to answer about 70 questions, arguing that they will consult with the head of state.

On the other hand, it was the socialist MP Klotilda Bushka, representative of the Assembly in this process, who said that her party needed only two hours to respond. Therefore, it is not necessary for the Presidency to have such a long term.

However, according to Dervishaj, the reason why the session was convened is for the dismissal of the president and not the Assembly. Therefore, according to him, more time is needed.

The court has already withdrawn for an interim decision to determine how much time they will give the president to respond.

What was discussed during the session?

In today’s session in the Constitutional Court where the request for the dismissal of the President of the Republic, Ilir Meta was reviewed, the defense presented itself in court with a voluminous file of 140 pages.

In his speech, the legal representative, Bledar Dervishaj said that after receiving questions from the Court, the Presidency has prepared all the necessary answers on the issue.

Meta’s demands remain the same as those in the first hearing against him, which was held on February 1. The President’s defense stressed that no single act of Meta has been discovered, where the head of state can be implicated in constitutional violations.

Also, according to Dervishaj, the principle of the rule of law and impartiality has been violated.

According to him, the Law Commission violated the Constitution by not respecting any deadline. He stated that the decision to dismiss the President was made in a transitional period of the Assembly, further emphasizing that the Commission of Inquiry was set up in the absence of an available facility and the Assembly has intervened in the powers of the head of state.

“If an investigative activity has started, pursuant to the law on Investigative Commissions, they have the duty to terminate it, at the moment when they are in the election period.“, Argued Dervishaj.

He accused the Assembly of trying to interfere in the way the President has exercised his function and for this reason, according to him, the Assembly has violated the principle of separation of powers.

“We started fictitious. The violations are obviously serious and flagrant and should be repealed by the Constitutional Court. The Assembly attempted to go directly into the way the President exercises his powers. The Assembly deliberately violated the principle of separation of powers. The Assembly tried to delegitimize and limit the activity of the President, conveying to the public that it is the Assembly that has the roles and exclusivity of the right“, Declared Dervishaj.

The defense of the President of the Republic, listing as after their weight a series of arguments, analyzes that the whole issue was done for the purpose of revenge.

“This course of action, without object and subject, has failed to identify a serious action or act, moreover clearly showing that the process is politically initiated, taking revenge on the President, limiting his role and avoiding attention from all problems of the electoral process“, He said.

Afterwards, Dervishaj continued to elaborate the case, formulating accusations on the government of the past four years.

From the very beginning, the legal representative of the institution of the President, citing the OSCE report on the 2017 general elections, stressed that the OSCE, had pointed out problems with vote theft and its purchase.

“The ODIHR recommendations for the 2017 elections remain unaddressed. Information about the criminal involvement of the majority representatives flowed in the media. Dibra files confirmed the connections of the authorities with crime and the Prosecution did not react to these two files“, He showed.

He did not forget to bring to the table the withdrawal of the opposition from the Parliament and the burning of mandates, underlining that the parliamentary groups no longer represented the opposition.

“The resignation of 55 opposition deputies in the bloc, who handed over the mandates. The majority reacted immediately, replacing the mandates with an unprecedented procedure. The Constitution and the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly stipulate that even for a deputy, the withdrawal from the mandates goes through the Council of Mandates and the Rules of Procedure and then in the session. This was done by the Secretary General, who notified the CEC and the latter replaced them all, with deputies at the bottom of the list, for whom the will of the people had not made their election possible. The majority through a resolution ordered the conduct of elections“, Said Dervishaj.

Dervishaj stressed that the dismissal of the President came from these parliamentary groups, which did not represent the opposition.

“For this reason, it is an invalid decision“, He said.

“In summary, we will record what has happened in Albania in these 4 years and how much the interests of Albanian citizens have been damaged. Wrong decisions and approaches that have had an impact. In the temporary extinction of democracy in local government, misinformation of the general public and that have affected the prosperity of the country. In the last session, examples of the constitutional doctrine of different countries were taken, but the doctrine does not resemble at all what happened in Albania and to describe the circumstances of the fact, after the 2017 elections, the result produced a composition of the Assembly with the SP , LSI, PD, PSD and PDIU. Three parliamentary groups were formed: PD, LSI and SP. When the decision was made, the Assembly consisted of “opposition” parliamentary groups that did not represent the political parties participating in the elections. At the time the Assembly took the decision to dismiss, he was represented by the SP, and the Democratic group“, He said.

He stressed that Albania throughout the ninth legislature was involved in a serious multi-plan and complex crisis that contained elements of a constitutional political crisis of representation.

“Its first element, started with the elections in violation of the Constitution, of the election of the General Prosecutor, December 2017 with 69 votes. “This was the first cause of the crisis and the deepening mistrust between the parties.”he said.

Also, according to him, another element is that in December 2018, the country was involved in mass student protests and the Prime Minister was tasked with renewing more than half of the government cabinet. Meanwhile, he adds, in December 2019, after the President elected the members of the Constitutional Court, the Prime Minister did not stop, asking the bodies not to implement the President’s decree and expanded the investigation into his dismissal.

In the first session held on February 1, after 11 hours of debate, the Constitution decided to postpone the session until Thursday.

On June 9, with 104 votes in favor, the Assembly of the previous Legislature decided to dismiss the President, and now a constitutional decision is needed for Meta to be dismissed.

Before the seven-member panel of the Court, representatives of the Assembly and the President defended their views expressed throughout this time.

The representatives of the majority, Taulant Balla and Klotilda Bushka, stated that the President should be dismissed for serious violations of the Constitution, not standing on the parties before and during the campaign, endangering the lives of citizens with strong statements and calls and damaging relations. with international partners.

On the other hand, the representatives of the President, Bledar Dervishi and Katrin Treska, stated their claims on the members of the Constitution, the legitimacy of the Assembly and the rejection of the issue.

top channel