The Constitutional Court dismissed this Tuesday the complaint of small parties about the Electoral Code.

The lawsuit was filed to overturn the Democratic Party- Socialist Party pact for closed lists and other changes in the Electoral Code, but this lawsuit was not taken into account by the Constitution.

Small parties demanded the overthrow of the changes in the Code, describing them as “incompatibility with the constitution”.

The court assessed that the claims of small parties are not grounded because they are related to the result of the vote, which corresponds to the distribution of mandates, while according to Article 64 of the Constitution, this distribution and the extent of preferential voting is delegated to the legislator, while the constitutional guarantee for the exercise of the right of preferential vote in Article 64, point 3 of the Constitution is related to the voting process.

The constitutionalist stated that she did not find a violation of the principle of equality before the law for both political parties and organizations and individuals in the aspects of the right to be elected and to vote.

Notice of the Court:

The Constitutional Court considered in a public plenary session the case with petitioners seven political parties, one organization and four individuals[1], with the object of repealing articles 67 and 163, points 2 and 3 of the Electoral Code, as incompatible with the Constitution of the Republic of Albania, as well as the final interpretation of Article 64 of the Constitution or its repeal.

Regarding the claim for the interpretation of Article 64 of the Constitution or its repeal, the Court assessed that the interpretation of the constitutional provision in itself cannot be separated from the basis of the case, therefore it will be analyzed together with the claims raised by the petitioners;  while the repeal of this constitutional provision is not part of the constitutional jurisdiction, since according to Article 131, point 2 of the Constitution, the Court has limited jurisdiction only for the control of compliance with the procedure provided by the Constitution, which was not claimed by the petitioners.

Regarding the basis of the claims, the Court noted that the petitioners have claimed that Article 67, point 1 of the Electoral Code by placing the conjunction “and” between its letters “a” and “b” determines the obligation of electoral subjects to present two multi-name lists, the one with fixed order and the one with candidates subject to preferential voting in violation of the provisions of Article 64, point 3 of the Constitution.

The court examined the claims of the parties for the violation of the right to vote, in two aspects, the right to be elected and to choose, provided for in articles 45 and 64 of the Constitution, related to the principle of equality before the law. The court assessed that the claims of the petitioners are not based because they are related to the result of the vote, which corresponds to the distribution of mandates, while according to Article 64 of the Constitution, this distribution and the measure of the extension of preferential voting is delegated to the legislator, while the constitutional guarantee for the exercise of the right of preferential vote in Article 64, point 3 of the Constitution is related to the voting process.

Based on this premise, the Court did not find a violation of the principle of equality before the law for both political parties and organizations and individuals in the two aspects above, the right to be elected and to choose, as long as in the analysis of the claims of the petitioners and the provisions under review, it was found that the legal provisions are addressed in the same way to all electoral subjects and voters, therefore, therefore, they do not differentiate between them in the voting process.

As for the claim of calculating the number of candidates of the list with a fixed order depending on the decimal point smaller or larger than 0.5 provided in point 2 of article 67 of the Electoral Code, the Court assessed that the claims of the petitioners are unfounded. To reach this conclusion, the Court considered that the multi-name list of political subjects consists of a list with a fixed order and a list subject to preferential voting (Article 67, Item 1 of the Electoral Code). The latter, as a component of the multi-name list of political subjects, guarantees the constitutional provision of Article 64, point 3 “that no less than two-thirds of the multi-name list shall be subject to preferential voting”.

Regarding the claim of the petitioners for the procedure for the adoption of the law, the Court did not reach the required number of votes for decision-making according to the provisions of Article 133, point 2 of the Constitution, detailed in Article 72, point 2, of Law no. 8577/2000.

At the end of the examination of the case, for the above reasons, the Court decided by majority vote: –

Dismissal of the request.

The final decision will be announced as reasoned within the legal deadlines provided by law no. 8577, dated 10.02.2000 “On the organization and functioning of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Albania”, as amended by the Regulation on Judicial Procedures of the Constitutional Court.