The full report that the Chairman of the DP Parliamentary Group, Gazment Bardhi, has sent to all diplomatic missions in Albania, regarding what the DP calls the annihilation of the opposition's constitutional rights in the Assembly and the degradation of standards in the functioning of the Assembly, has been released.

The detailed report contains specific data on each control mechanism that the opposition claims has been denied to the opposition in these 6 months of the new Legislature of the Assembly. It lists that during these six months, the majority in the Assembly has rejected a significant number of Investigative Committees, interpellations, motions with debate or requests for information.

The report emphasizes that a concern for the opposition remains its exclusion from any transparency regarding the European integration process, or the majority's failure to implement the decisions of the Constitutional Court.

"The political stance of the majority to block any constitutional right of the opposition, reject any legal initiative, exclude it from the process of appointments to independent institutions, or exclude it from the integration process, makes the role of opposition MPs in Parliament not only negligible, but above all a facade of a false normality, which undermines the very principles and minimum standards of democratic parliamentarism. This situation seriously questions the very purpose of the opposition's continued presence in Parliament. If the opposition cannot discuss issues of public interest, cannot exercise oversight over governance, cannot propose laws or amendments for the benefit of citizens, and if its constitutional rights are ignored, then its role becomes merely formal, failing to fulfill its democratic responsibilities," the DP Parliamentary Group Report states, among other things.

The report of the DP Parliamentary Group has also been officially sent to the Speaker of the Parliament, Niko Peleshi.

Full letter:

ASSEMBLY
Parliamentary Group of the Democratic Party

ON THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF THE ROLE OF THE PARLIAMENTARY OPPOSITION AND THE CONTINUOUS DEGRADATION OF DEMOCRATIC STANDARDS IN THE FUNCTIONING OF THE ASSEMBLY

Directed by: Mr. Niko PELESHI
Speaker of the Assembly of Albania
For information: Embassies of partner countries/organizations accredited in Albania

Honorable Mr. Speaker of the Parliament,

Albania is at a key moment in the European integration process, which should also serve as an opportunity to strengthen the democratization of Albanian institutions, including the democratic functioning of the Albanian Parliament. Unfortunately, not only is this not happening, but the majority in the Assembly, through its actions and inactions, is aiming to annihilate the role of the opposition in Parliament.

There is clearly an attempt to unite the state with the ruling party and the parliamentary majority, day after day, treats the Parliament as a one-party institution, where decisions are dictated not by the force of reason, not by constitutional responsibility and legal rights, but by the strength of their numbers in the Assembly. The majority continues to deny opposition MPs the exercise of their parliamentary rights, preventing them from fulfilling their duties to protect the public interest. To date, our requests for a “debate motion”, “interpellation with the Prime Minister or ministers”, “hearing sessions” in parliamentary committees, or the establishment of “investigative committees”, have been overwhelmingly rejected.

On the other hand, the legal proposals of the opposition MPs (including draft laws or amendments) are rejected without any justification, simply for the fact that they are proposals of an opposition MP. In fact, in some cases it has been observed that after the rejection of the legal initiative of the opposition MPs, the same proposal is made by a majority MP or the Council of Ministers and it is approved by the Assembly. This is a clear indication that the majority is not interested in constructive political dialogue in the Assembly of Albania.

Also, with unprecedented actions, in a considerable number of plenary sessions, the voting on draft laws was carried out without undergoing the parliamentary debate process, putting the draft laws to the vote without being previously discussed by the deputies and without guaranteeing transparency for our citizens.

Mr. Speaker of the Assembly,

The European Commission's 2025 Albania Report highlights, among other things, that: "The Parliament was able to exercise its powers in a partially effective manner. Political polarization, the lack of genuine political dialogue and clashes between the ruling majority and parts of the opposition continued to affect the Parliament's activity, while public consultation processes remained limited. The Parliament is also hampered by limited oversight of the executive, while the politicization of parliamentary appointments to senior positions in constitutional bodies or independent institutions established by law remains a serious issue."

Meanwhile, in a public reaction of the European Union Delegation dated March 24, 2026, it is underlined, among other things, that: "The EU Delegation recalls that the opposition has an important role to play in parliament and in the democratic life of the country, including and especially in the context of fundamental reforms."

In response to this obligation within the framework of the European integration process, the Parliamentary Group of the Democratic Party and the opposition as a whole, since the start of the 11th Legislature, has been constructively engaged in the Assembly of Albania, but day by day the majority is preventing us from exercising our responsibilities, aiming to turn the role of the parliamentary opposition into a facade.

In any democratic country, one of the key functions of Parliament — usually exercised by the opposition — is its oversight role. Taking into account the findings of the European Commission’s 2025 Report, which underlines that “Parliament is also hampered by limited oversight of the executive”, we have done everything to fulfill this responsibility, using some of the control mechanisms allowed by the Constitution and the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly. However, our rights have been consistently denied. The same repeated behavior proves that we are dealing with a long-term strategy of the socialist majority to limit the rights of the opposition until their complete annihilation.

More concret:

I. In the 6 months of the functioning of the Assembly of Albania in the 11th Legislature, you have refused to establish 5 Commissions of Inquiry requested by no less than 35 deputies, by not accepting any request for the establishment of an Commission of Inquiry, in flagrant violation of Article 77 of the Constitution. According to Article 77, paragraph 2 of the Constitution of Albania, the Parliament has the right and, upon the request of one quarter of its members (35 deputies), has the obligation to establish an investigation commission to examine a specific issue. The same right is also guaranteed by Article 25 of the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly.

According to the Constitution and several decisions of the Constitutional Court of Albania: (1) Parliamentary investigative committees are an effective oversight mechanism that operates exclusively within the oversight competence of the Parliament and are established for specific issues functionally related to the legislative power. Their establishment, when requested by a quarter of the deputies, is mandatory. (2) In a parliamentary democracy, it is not the majority that oversees the government — this is the duty of the opposition. Therefore, this constitutional right of the minority to establish investigative committees must remain inviolable. (3) It is true that the Constitutional Court has emphasized that the right to conduct parliamentary investigations is not unlimited; its limitation lies in ensuring that the object of the investigation respects constitutional principles and standards. However, the Court has also emphasized that, when the majority claims that the subject matter of the investigation violates these standards, it is obliged to propose alternative formulations, enabling the minority to reformulate its request in accordance with them.

In all cases, the opposition has expressed its willingness to welcome any alternative formulation of the parliamentary majority on the object of the investigation, and your side has refused to do so. Consequently, the majority has rejected the opposition's constitutional right to establish these Investigative Commissions by political vote (5 rejected and 0 accepted):

1. Request for the establishment of the Investigative Commission No. 2892 Prot., dated 13.10.2025 – on the control of the legality of the actions and inactions of central and local government bodies, on the use of state resources for electoral purposes in the general elections of May 11, 2025.
2. Request for the establishment of the Investigative Commission No. 2991 prot., dated 20.10.2025 – on the verification of the legality of the actions of Albanian public officials in relations with former FBI special agent Charles McGonigal.
3. Request for the establishment of the Investigative Committee No. 3117 Prot., dated 28.10.2025 – on the control of legality in the administration of European funds of the IPARD II program.
4. Request for the establishment of the Investigative Commission No. 1404 Prot., dated 01.04.2026 – on the control of the legality of the actions/inactions of the Albanian Road Authority (ARA) for the implementation of investments in road infrastructure.
5. Request for the establishment of the Investigative Commission No. 1440 Prot., dated 03.04.2026 – on the control of the legality of the functioning of the National Agency for the Protection of Personal Data of Citizens, the measures taken to protect the personal data of citizens and the risks to national security as a NATO member country.

II. In the 6 months of the functioning of the Assembly of Albania in the 11th Legislature, you have rejected 7 requests for interpellation with the Prime Minister and 2 requests for interpellation with the Deputy Prime Minister. Meanwhile, requests for interpellation with Ministers or question-and-answer sessions with them are outside the constitutional deadline for their implementation (for example: 3 requests for interpellation with the Minister of Health or 2 requests for a question-and-answer session with him).

This action is contrary to Article 80, point 1 of the Constitution, which states that: “The Prime Minister and any other member of the Council of Ministers is obliged to respond to interpellations and questions from deputies within three weeks.” Likewise, this action contradicts Articles 90, 92, 95, 96 and 97 of the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly.

According to Article 90 of the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly, “1. Every Member of Parliament has the right to ask questions to the Prime Minister or any other member of the Council of Ministers. Members of Parliament shall submit questions to the President of the Assembly, who shall inform the member of the Council of Ministers to whom the question is addressed.” On the other hand, Article 92 provides that: “1. At the beginning of each plenary session, at least 45 minutes shall be devoted to the question session, except when otherwise specified in the calendar of proceedings. A member of the Council of Ministers is obliged to answer questions at the beginning of each plenary session. The Prime Minister, once a week, is obliged to answer questions for 30 minutes.”

Also, Article 96 of the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly provides that: “1. An interpellation is a written request addressed to the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister or any other member of the Council of Ministers to obtain explanations on the motives, objectives and position of the Council of Ministers or regarding important aspects of their activity. The interpellation is submitted to the President of the Assembly, who immediately informs the member of the Council of Ministers to whom the request for interpellation is addressed. 3. They are scheduled to be held in plenary session, as a rule, on the three Mondays following the date of submission.”.

The accountability of the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and Ministers to the Assembly is not optional, but an obligation under the Constitution and the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly, in accordance with the principle of separation and balance of powers. Accountability is not a delegable process, whether it occurs before the judicial authorities or before the Assembly. This is due to the fact that accountability is not a right or a competence (which can be delegated), but is an obligation for the public official (which cannot be delegated).
We bring to your attention that in 6 months of this Legislature, you have rejected these requested interpellations with the Prime Minister (7 rejected, 0 accepted):
1. Request for interpellation No. 2648 Prot., dated 29.09.2025 – on the impact of organized crime on the economy and its strengthening through permits, licenses or public funds granted by government authorities.
2. Request for interpellation No. 2921 Prot., dated 14.10.2025 – on the action of demolishing unauthorized constructions, outside the prescribed legal procedures and without a final court decision.
3. Request for interpellation No. 240 Prot., dated 19.01.2026 – on the measures taken by the Government to protect personal data administered by the National Agency for the Protection of Personal Data.
4. Request for interpellation No. 1046 Prot., dated 09.03.2026 – on the functioning of the Albanian Investment Corporation in the administration of public properties.
5. Request for interpellation No. 1176 Prot., dated 18.03.2026 – on the suspension of the license of the state-owned airline Air Albania.
6. Request for interpellation No. 1177 Prot., dated 18.03.2026 – on the cancellation of the tender for the new Port of Durrës in Porto Romano.
7. Request for interpellation No. 1439 Prot., dated 03.04.2026 – on institutional verification standards and measures taken to implement the Anti-Mafia Law and anti-money laundering legislation in the decision-making of the National Council for Territory and Water (KKTU).

You also rejected these requested interpellations with the Deputy Prime Minister (2 rejected, 0 accepted):
1. Request for interpellation No. 2922 Prot., dated 14.10.2025 – on explanations for the procedure of the Thumanë-Kashar project.
2. Request for interpellation No. 3227 Prot., dated 03.11.2025 – on explanations for the procedure of the Llogara Tunnel project.

Furthermore, you have exceeded the constitutional deadline of 3 weeks for these requested interpellations with the Minister of Health and the Minister of Agriculture (4 not completed within the deadline, 0 accepted)
1. Request for interpellation no. 531 Prot., dated 06.02.2026 – on the serious situation at the Oncology Hospital at the QSUT.
2. Request for interpellation no. 772 Prot., dated 20.02.2026 – on the serious state of conditions at the Lushnja Regional Hospital.
3. Request for interpellation No. 926 Prot., dated 02.03.2026 – on the management of the healthcare system and the situation with the supply of medicines in hospitals.
4. Request for interpellation No. 4093 Prot., dated 16.12.2025 – on the mismanagement of IPARD funds in the agricultural sector.

III. In the 6 months of the functioning of the Assembly of Albania in the 11th Legislature, you have rejected 6 requests for the development of a “motion with debate” on issues of interest to Albanian citizens. The motion with debate is one of the forms of parliamentary control provided for by the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly.

Specifically, Article 98 of the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly provides that: “1. A parliamentary group leader or at least 7 deputies may submit a motion for the purpose of holding a debate in the Assembly on a specific issue and, at its conclusion, may propose the adoption of a resolution or declaration, the text of which is attached to the request for the holding of the motion. 2. The request for the holding of a motion shall be submitted to the President of the Assembly, who shall convene the Conference of Speakers within 3 days to decide on the date for the holding of the motion in plenary session. If the date is determined by mutual agreement in the Conference of Speakers, it shall be notified to the Assembly at the first plenary session. If the Conference of Speakers does not reach an agreement among the chairmen of the parliamentary groups, the President of the Assembly shall submit the request to the plenary session, propose a date for the holding of the motion and ask the Assembly to decide by open vote after hearing one speaker in favor and one against for no more than more than 10 minutes. In any case, the debate cannot take place later than 30 days from the date of submission of the motion.”.

According to the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly, it is clear that when a “motion with debate” is requested by a parliamentary group leader or at least 7 deputies, its development is mandatory. The only issue that is put up for discussion, in the Conference of Speakers or in the plenary session, is only the date of the debate and the total time of the discussion. Even for this issue, the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly have set the maximum time within which the debate must be developed, which is no later than 30 days from the date of submission of the motion. In no case, the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly allow the plenary session to decide whether or not to develop a “motion with debate”, because it is a control mechanism independent of the will of the parliamentary majority. Consequently, your repeated action in all rejected cases to put to a vote whether or not to accept the request to hold a "motion with debate" is in clear violation of the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly, because you cannot put to a vote whether the rights of minority deputies should be respected.

Specifically, during this Legislature, you have rejected these requests for the development of a "Motion with debate" requested by the opposition (6 rejected; 1 accepted and 1 in process):
1. Request for Motion with Debate No. 2628 Prot., dated 26.09.2025 – on the Government's priorities in the political program of the Council of Ministers on Albania's advancement in the EU.
2. Request for Motion with Debate No. 2659 Prot., dated 29.09.2025 – on taking measures by the Government to recognize the Serbian genocide in Kosovo.
3. Request for Motion with Debate No. 2731 Prot., dated 03.10.2025 – on the measures taken by the Government to guarantee the correct management of European funds of the IPARD program.
4. Request for Motion with Debate No. 2912 Prot., dated 14.10.2025 – on the availability of drugs for the treatment of tumor diseases according to the findings of the report of the Supreme State Audit.
5. Request for Motion with Debate No. 3397 Prot., dated 11.11.2025 – on the lack of determination of the subsistence minimum and its impact on the economic and social rights of citizens, according to the reports of the Ombudsman.
6. Request for Motion with Debate No. 3526 Prot., dated 14.11.2025 – on the measures taken by the Government to fight with zero tolerance against organized crime.

IV. In the 6 months of the functioning of the Assembly of Albania in the 11th Legislature, a total of 26 plenary sessions have been held, of which only 10 plenary sessions have concluded normally and a vote has been taken at the end of all discussions of the deputies registered to speak (February 19, February 12, February 3, January 27, January 22, December 11, December 4, November 19, October 30, October 27). Meanwhile, 8 plenary sessions were interrupted without concluding the discussions, proceeding to a vote without parliamentary discussion of the draft laws (April 2, March 12, March 5, December 18, November 6, October 16, October 9, September 18), while 8 other plenary sessions were without a proper agenda (of which 3 for voter issues – March 30, March 2, December 2; 3 of an organizational nature – September 12, September 16, September 24; and 2 without an agenda, only notification/approval of the minutes – September 29; March 17).

Voting on draft laws without allowing MPs to discuss their content is an act in open violation of the Constitution and the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly, and violates the right of citizens to transparency and the obligation of MPs to be accountable to their constituents. We bring to your attention that such an act violates the constitutional right to freedom of expression of MPs and parliamentary democracy in decision-making, by denying MPs the opportunity to clarify their position on the draft law.

On the other hand, such an action is contrary to Articles 49 and 66 of the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly. Article 49 of the Rules of Procedure provides that: “On matters of procedure, the floor shall be given immediately. Matters of procedure shall include requests relating to the implementation of the Rules of Procedure, requests containing proposals for amendments or supplements to the approved agenda, requests for the interruption or postponement of the plenary session or discussions, as well as requests relating to the manner of making decisions or conducting voting.”.

This provision clearly does not provide for the possibility of proceeding to a vote without concluding the discussions of the registered deputies, as a matter of procedure and subject to a vote. A motion to interrupt or postpone the session or discussions may be voted on, but in no way does it provide for the possibility that the interruption of discussions be accompanied by the possibility of proceeding to a vote without concluding the discussion.

This rule is also reinforced in Article 66 of the Rules of Procedure, which provides that: “1. If the order of business in the plenary session hall is seriously violated, chaos is caused and the requirements for maintaining order are not taken into account, the chairman of the plenary session leaves his seat and the plenary session is declared suspended. 2. If, after the resumption of the session, the chaos continues again, the chairman of the plenary session suspends the session for a certain period of time or closes it. 3. In the event of the closure of the plenary session, the Assembly convenes in the earliest plenary session with the same agenda.”

V. In the 6 months of the functioning of the Assembly of Albania in the 11th Legislature, opposition deputies have undertaken 71 legal initiatives (specifically: they have proposed 18 draft laws and 53 amendments to draft laws deposited in the Assembly). Of these, 63 legal initiatives have been reviewed and voted on so far (8 draft laws have not yet begun the review and approval procedure), and all have been rejected without any justification. Specifically:
• 10 draft laws reviewed, but rejected and 0 accepted.
• 53 amendments considered, but rejected and 0 accepted.

This fully proves that the current majority encourages political polarization and conflict, and is against real political dialogue in the interest of citizens. Specifically, your decisions to not approve even in principle the draft laws proposed by the opposition are as follows:

1. Decision “On the non-approval in principle of the draft law “On some additions and amendments to Law No. 34/2019, dated 17.06.2019 “On the administration of seized and confiscated assets”, as amended””.
2. Decision No. 44/2026 “On the non-approval in principle of the draft law “On an amendment to Law No. 68/2017 “On local self-government finances””, as amended.
3. Decision No. 43/2026 “On the non-approval in principle of the draft law “On an amendment to law No. 9975, dated 28.7.2008, “On national taxes””, as amended.
4. Decision No. 20/2026 “On the non-approval in principle of the draft law “On an addition to Law No. 80/2015 “On higher education and scientific research in higher education institutions in the Republic of Albania””.
5. Decision No. 23/2026 “On the non-approval in principle of the draft law “On the necessity of conducting laboratory analyses for food contaminants””.
6. Decision No. 21/2026 “On the non-approval in principle of the draft law “On an addition to Law No. 92/2014 “On Value Added Tax in the Republic of Albania””, as amended.
7. Decision No. 18/2026 “On the non-approval in principle of the draft law “On some amendments to Law No. 27/2018 “On Cultural Heritage and Museums””.
8. Decision No. 22/2026 “On the non-approval in principle of the draft law “On the status of the miner in the Republic of Albania””.
9. Decision No. 7/2026 “On the non-approval in principle of the draft law “On some amendments and additions to law No. 7895, dated 27.1.1995, “Criminal Code of the Republic of Albania””, as amended.
10. Decision No. 93/2025 “On the non-approval in principle of the draft law “On an addition to law no. 10129, dated 11.5.2009, “On civil status”, as amended.

VI. The majority in the Assembly has undertaken an open attack on opposition MPs to prevent them from participating in the work of the Assembly and by following a practice with two different standards for majority MPs and opposition MPs.

Specifically, in the 6 months of operation of the 11th Legislature, the Parliamentary Group of the Socialist Patria has submitted 7 requests for disciplinary measures against opposition MPs, all of which have been accepted – excluding 15 opposition MPs from the Assembly proceedings with a total exclusion time of 295 days (exclusions ranging from 10 – 50 days to 6 months, depending on the MP). Meanwhile, the Parliamentary Group of the Democratic Party has submitted 4 requests for disciplinary measures against majority MPs, none of which have been accepted, even though the violation was the same or even more serious.

VII. The European Commission, in its 2025 Country Report for Albania, has identified as a matter of concern “the politicization of parliamentary appointments to senior positions in constitutional bodies or independent institutions established by law”. In response to this concern, in order to address it, the Parliamentary Group of the Democratic Party, through letter no. 3759 Prot., dated 02.12.2025, has proposed a transparent process of appointment/election of independent institutions, which included a constructive consultation of all parliamentary groups in the Assembly, with the aim of preserving the independence of these bodies and respecting the principle of meritocracy. This would create the necessary premise to maintain citizens' trust in these bodies.

We would like to bring to your attention that the Albanian Parliament is involved in the appointment/election procedures of independent bodies, in order to maintain the balance between powers and that in no case independent institutions are equated with the governing majority. This is mostly guaranteed through the involvement of the opposition in this process. By completely excluding the opposition from the selection/appointment process of independent constitutional or legally established institutions, the majority has managed to politicize every independent institution and control 100% of all appointments to independent institutions (including collegial bodies, where the parliamentary rule and tradition have aimed for a proportional division of nomination proposals between the majority and the opposition). This means the total capture of the state by the governing majority, violating the principle of separation and balance between powers, sanctioned in Article 7 of the Constitution.

Moreover, since the publication of the European Commission’s Albania 2025 Report, the current majority has not taken any steps to address the concern about the politicization of parliamentary appointments to senior positions in constitutional bodies or independent institutions established by law. Even after the publication of the Report, the majority has continued to unilaterally dictate/propose/vote alone on all appointments to independent institutions.

In the 6 months of the functioning of the Assembly of Albania in the 11th Legislature, 11 appointments have been made to independent institutions, all of which were made solely by the majority through a unilateral process, as follows:
• 5 members of the Supervisory Council of the Bank of Albania – decisions 24-27/2026 and expected decision of 9.4.2026;
• Ombudsman – decision no. 111/2025;
• Member of the Board of the Financial Supervisory Agency (AMF) – decision no. 102/2025;
• Commissioner for Civil Service Supervision – decision no. 103/2025;
• Member of the Competition Authority Commission – decision dated 2.4.2026;
• Member of the Steering Council of the Electronic and Postal Communications Authority (AKEP) – decision dated 2.4.2026;
• Chairman of the Competition Authority Commission – expected decision on 9.4.2026.

VIII. The opposition is excluded from the integration process, having no information on the Assembly's agenda for draft laws that need to be approved in the framework of legislative approximation, as well as no detailed information on the implementation of obligations under the National Plan for European Integration, the progress of the accession negotiations process, and the management of funds from the European Union and other donors.

According to Law No. 15/2015 “On the role of the Parliament in the process of integration of the Republic of Albania into the European Union”, as amended, and Article 103/1 of the Rules of Procedure of the Parliament, the Council of Ministers must inform the Parliament on the European integration process, as a form of parliamentary control over the process of integration into the European Union. The Council of Ministers has refused to fulfill its legal obligations and no measures have been taken by you.

Specifically, according to point 1, article 18 of Law no. 15/2015, the Council of Ministers, by January 31 of each year, shall submit to the Assembly a detailed report on the implementation of obligations under the National Plan for European Integration, the progress of the accession negotiations process and the management of funds from the European Union and other donors, for the previous year. The report is reviewed in a plenary session, at the end of which the Assembly adopts the relevant resolution. We would like to bring to your attention that even though we are in the month of April, the Council of Ministers has not fulfilled this obligation.

On the other hand, according to point 2, article 18 of Law no. 15/2015, the Council of Ministers, no later than three weeks from the publication of the European Commission's Progress Report, reports to the Assembly on the findings, recommendations, the current situation of political, economic and social developments in the country, as well as on the concrete commitments to fulfill the recommendations. The report is reviewed in a plenary session, at the end of which the Assembly adopts the relevant resolution. We bring to your attention that although more than 4 months have passed since the publication of the European Commission's Progress Report for 2025, the Council of Ministers has not fulfilled this obligation.

Furthermore, according to point 3, Article 18 of Law No. 15/2015, the Council of Ministers and the minister responsible for negotiations with the European Union inform in plenary session the conclusions on the negotiation of a chapter or group of chapters following the holding of the intergovernmental conference with the European Union.

The obligation to report by the Council of Ministers is also detailed in the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly, where in its Article 103/1, it is provided that:
1. The Assembly monitors the work of the Council of Ministers in relation to the implementation of obligations for the European integration process and of independent constitutional institutions established by law, according to the provisions of Articles 18-20 of the legislation in force on the role of the Assembly in the process of integration of the Republic of Albania into the European Union. 2. At the beginning of each year, the Assembly reviews the detailed report of the Council of Ministers on the integration process, according to the National Plan for European Integration. 3. After the report is filed, the President of the Assembly immediately sends it to the responsible committee for review. The committee organizes a hearing to review the report and, at the end, drafts a draft resolution that it submits to the plenary session. 4. The Assembly organizes a session with debate and at the end of it adopts the relevant resolution. 5. The Assembly, no later than two weeks after the filing of the report of the Council of Ministers on the findings and recommendations of the European Commission's progress report, organizes a plenary session, at the end of which the relevant resolution is adopted.

Although the legal provisions are clear, the Council of Ministers, through inaction, has refused to fulfill these obligations, thereby preventing the Assembly as a whole and the opposition in particular from fulfilling their supervisory role within the framework of the European integration process. This action also undermines the transparency that the Council of Ministers should guarantee regarding the integration process, thus preventing Albanian citizens from being informed about the progress of this process, which is supported by the overwhelming majority of Albanians.

XI. Also, in an unprecedented act, the majority unilaterally changed the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly and without any consultation with the opposition changed the organizational structure of the Assembly committees, dictating to the opposition a message from the Prime Minister at the Socialist Party Assembly. This action was unanimously found unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court on February 23, 2025, but the majority has given all indications that it will not implement the decision of the Constitutional Court.

It is already a fact that the Assembly has refused to implement some decisions of the Constitutional Court or opinions of the Venice Commission, when they were not in line with the political will of the majority (we recall here the case of the mandate of MP Olta Xhacka, the decision of the Constitutional Court and the opinion of the Venice Commission for which they remain unimplemented.). The non-implementation of the decisions of the Constitutional Court is a serious violation of Article 132 of the Constitution.
X. According to the Constitution and the law on the status of a deputy, state institutions are obliged to inform the deputy on issues requested by them, within 15 days from the date of sending the request. This right of deputies is consistently not respected by the executive and local government bodies. Specifically, there are over 20 requests for information sent by opposition deputies that have not received any response from state institutions. This makes it impossible for deputies to exercise control over the state activity of the executive and local government.

Specifically, it turns out that the following requests for information from MPs were rejected:
• 6 requests without information from MP Enno Bozdo;
• 6 requests without information from MP Albana Vokshi
• 1 request without information from MP Xhelal Mziu
• 8 requests without information from MP Belind Këllici.

Mr. Speaker of the Assembly,

The political stance of the majority to block any constitutional right of the opposition, reject any legal initiative, exclude it from the appointment process to independent institutions, or exclude it from the integration process, makes the role of opposition members of parliament not only negligible, but above all a facade of a false normality, which undermines the very principles and minimum standards of democratic parliamentarism. This situation seriously questions the very purpose of the opposition's continued presence in parliament. If the opposition cannot discuss issues of public interest, cannot exercise oversight over the government, cannot propose laws or amendments for the benefit of citizens, and if its constitutional rights are ignored, then its role becomes merely formal, failing to fulfill its democratic responsibilities.

We would like to inform you that, while we remain committed to operating within the democratic institutional framework, we will never accept the annihilation of parliamentarism or the denial of our constitutional rights. A country that aims to join the European Union, but that violates the basic rules of democratic coexistence within the Parliament — where the majority and the opposition have their respective roles and responsibilities — cannot be anything other than a propaganda of a false normality. We want Albania to move towards the European Union not through empty propaganda, but through genuine standards and institutions that function democratically, starting from the institution that constitutes the essence of our Republic – the Assembly of Albania.

As explained above, one fundamental question remains: Taking into account all the above obstacles, how can the opposition play its important role in parliament and in the democratic life of the country?

White Gazment