{"id":16332,"date":"2021-06-25T11:00:12","date_gmt":"2021-06-25T09:00:12","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/euronews.al\/en\/?p=16332"},"modified":"2021-06-25T11:00:12","modified_gmt":"2021-06-25T09:00:12","slug":"lapaj-the-constitutional-court-couldve-sent-the-questions-to-venice-but-it-left-them-up-to-the-parties-involved","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/euronews.al\/en\/lapaj-the-constitutional-court-couldve-sent-the-questions-to-venice-but-it-left-them-up-to-the-parties-involved\/","title":{"rendered":"Lapaj: The Constitutional Court could\u2019ve sent the questions to Venice but it left them up to the parties involved"},"content":{"rendered":"

After a marathon 9-hour session, the Constitutional Court decided to turn to the Venice Commission, for an opinion regarding the dispute on the questioned legitimacy of the local elections held on June 30th<\/sup> in Albania. Attorney, Adriatik Lapaj, revealed his interpretation of the matter during an interview on Euronews Albania.<\/p>\n

Lapaj began his argument by saying that the Constitutional Court is in its beginner stages and we shouldn\u2019t put a lot of pressure on it during the first steps of its work.<\/p>\n

The attorney emphasized that this is a case that holds within it, a political character and that the Constitutional Court wants to express itself through a constitutional judgment that will simultaneously overturn any possible alibies presented by the involved parties, making claims of impartiality.<\/p>\n

He judged the decision to take the case for consultation at the Venice Commission, as a reasonable one, adding that this is a right that is foreseen by the law.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe special law for the Constitutional Court, article no. 44 B, clearly foresees that our court can suspend its judgment during the presentation of a case before this court, and it can turn to a European Court of Human Rights for an opinion, or to other local or international bodies, for advice and an additional assessment,\u201d argued Adriatik Lapaj.<\/p>\n

In regards to the questions that the involved parties will be presenting to the Venice Commission, Lapaj said that the Constitutional Court had the right to send them by itself, but for the purpose of not being faced with claims that the voices of any of the sides might\u2019ve not been heard, it decided to let the involved parties pose the questions they see most fit to the Commission.<\/p>\n

\u201cThere won\u2019t be any fact-collecting process by the Commission of Venice. The Court could\u2019ve sent the questions but it gave the involved parties time so that each can present a question. This way, in the future, none of the parties can claim that they weren\u2019t heard. They will have been heard at a level of an international counseling body. The Constitutional Court is the one that decides, in the end,\u201d stated Lapaj.<\/p>\n

Adriatik Lapaj also added that as long as the Constitutional Court has sent the case to a plenary session and after the 9-hour long discussions, it has decided to take counsel with the Venice Commission, it means that the debate exists. This, according to the attorney, means that there\u2019s a high probability that the request might be accepted.<\/p>\n

Adriatik Lapaj ended his argument by saying that the last verdict belongs to the Constitutional Court and that the Venice Commission only has a counseling role.<\/p>\n

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE<\/strong><\/p>\n