Kosovo and Albania, one nation, one people, two states, follow different electoral dynamics despite converging socio-cultural similarities. This phenomenon clearly reflects today the difference between a functional democracy and one with structural defects and state interference.
In Albania, since the first pluralist elections in 1991 until today, several different electoral systems have been applied. In the elections of March 31, 1991, the majoritarian system was applied, which was a system of direct competition between candidates of political parties or independent candidates. This system produced the first parliament voted after the communist dictatorship, with a direct connection through voters and representatives. Starting from 1992, the mixed system was implemented, a combined system of the majoritarian and proportional systems, where 100 deputies were directly elected by the majoritarian system, while 40 others were filled through the proportional one. Later, the proportional system was implemented, which was thought of as a chance for all political factors to overcome the acceptable electoral threshold in order to be represented in Parliament. In 2009 and 2017, Albania applied a closed regional proportional system, with an electoral threshold of 3% for parties and 4% for political coalitions. In 2021, a proportional system with fractional fractions, and in 2025, a proportional system with closed lists and open lists.
The most notable feature of the electoral systems implemented in Albania over the past 30 years is their systematic change. Since December 1990, when Albanian political pluralism came into being, a total of 11 parliamentary election processes have been held. Today, Albania is divided into 12 electoral zones (counties) with a variable number of deputies based on population, where entities compete with two lists, a closed list (one third of the seats) and an open list (two thirds of the seats), based on the regional proportional electoral system with closed and open lists.
On the other hand, Kosovo uses a national proportional electoral system with open lists, which aims to represent the citizens' vote as fairly as possible in Parliament. Seats in the Assembly are allocated in accordance with the number of votes that political parties receive at the national level. This system favors the inclusion of a wide range of political entities, guaranteeing pluralism and representation of different ethnic and political groups as an essential criterion for stability in the country and the region. Through the typology of this system, the voter enjoys considerable power, as well as greater responsibility for his choices and their political consequences. He chooses the party and 10 candidates according to his preference.
Another aspect is the 5% electoral threshold, which helps maintain a balance between political pluralism and governing efficiency. While the proportional system is an advantage for small parties, the electoral threshold helps avoid excessive political fragmentation and create stable government coalitions.
As a state that declared its independence in 2008, Kosovo has not hesitated to change governments and go to early elections when crises or inter-party, but also parliamentary, disputes have arisen. In just 18 years, Kosovo has had 7 different governments, an indicator that shows how the responsibility of representation is valued first and foremost, and at the same time debate, criticism and agreement to not always agree.
What is the most suitable system for Albania and what are the elements of Kosovo that could be adopted?
What is important to emphasize is that there is no electoral system that can be applied and maximally guarantees all the ideal dimensions of a state, so the choice must reflect a compromise for the most fundamental interests of society and not just of political parties, whatever they may be.
We note a clear contrast between Albania and Kosovo, the democratic principles in the latter being more functional. In fact, the electoral system has been best adapted to the dynamics of the state and their governance model, implementing an electoral model whose architecture limits state intervention in the electoral system and guarantees a clear separation between state power and political competition. State institutions are kept distanced from elections, public administration is not politically instrumentalized and the electoral competition takes place under more equal conditions. In the Albanian context, the opposite is observed: state intervention in elections has distorted democratic competition by creating an increasingly tight knot in the electoral process.
Although a new state with a tense geopolitical situation, Kosovo has immediately taken important steps and has remained stoic to the idealism that the citizen decides, the citizen chooses. For 18 years, open lists have educated citizens about the importance and unanimity of the vote, about a vote that is not lumped in with the others, but that directly identifies a caste of voices that will represent them in the Assembly.
Another important characteristic of Kosovo's electoral dynamics is the fact that when there is disagreement or no confidence from the Parliament, the government is paralyzed and the country goes to early elections. Meanwhile, the Albanian political scene is characterized by two major parties, where one has respected the principle of rotation after two mandates, while the other has followed a strategy to maintain power by any means. The greatest absurdity in a democracy, but the image of normality in an autocracy, lies in the fact that, election after election, the party in power wins more mandates than the previous time. So, unlike Kosovo, which in times of crisis returns to the basis of democracy, the free vote to decide, in Albania the illusion of the latter is created through repression and propaganda that try to convince the citizen that there is no other alternative, that he is incapable of real influence, that he is forced to follow the course calmly and accept his fate determined by a group of people that he himself has chosen. Such a big difference in two neighboring countries belonging to the same ethnicity, where one teaches the other that the people should not fear their government, but the government should fear the people who elected it.
Taking the example of Kosovo to adapt the electoral system to the socio-political dynamics in Albania, the proposal of a majoritarian system would be the primary instrument for increasing democracy and protecting elections from state influence. In fact, previous political experience has shown that this system has functioned as a more democratic, more transparent mechanism for the selection of candidates and the representation of citizens.
In the practice of the Democratic Party, the then process of selecting candidates in the majoritarian system, but not only, was carried out through an institutional balance within the party that strengthened the influence of the structures: The branch presidencies proposed the names for the electoral zones, while the final decision-making belonged to the National Council. This model created an internal democratic filter, avoiding arbitrary appointments and guaranteeing a level of political legitimacy for the candidates representing the designated zones. Seen from a broader perspective, the political tradition of the right in Albania has proven a greater ability to identify and promote figures with integrity, with particular importance in majoritarian races, where the weight of the individual and the direct relationship with the voter translate as the decisive factors.
Through this system, a form of collective control is ensured and the absolute concentration of power in the hands of an individual or a narrow circle of leaders is avoided. In contrast to the current proportional system with closed or semi-open lists, where the ranking of candidates determines their political fate, the majoritarian system gives real weight to the citizen's vote and the competition on the ground. The restoration of the majoritarian system with a clear territorial division into electoral zones would also contribute to the decentralization of politics, bringing decision-making power closer to the citizen. This model would also reduce the phenomenon of "zoneless" deputies and strengthen the representation of local interests in the Assembly, turning the Parliament into a more pluralistic space and more connected to social reality. Finally, the establishment of a majoritarian system would constitute an important step for the development of the electoral process in Albania, creating prospects for its possible derivatives, such as the corrected majoritarian system, which aims to further optimize the duality "government-political representation".
In a context where elections in Albania continue to remain contested and citizens' trust in the democratic process is low, the majoritarian system should not be seen simply as a technical electoral formula, but as a political solution for restoring democratic balances, limiting state influence, and restoring the sovereignty of the vote.
