Baraliu: PDK should have better explained its move to return amendments to the Law on Specialist Chambers

Constitutional law professor Mazllum Baraliu said the amendments to the Law on Specialist Chambers contained legal shortcomings and provisions that were not fully in line with the Constitution of Kosovo. Despite these flaws, however, their adoption carried particular political significance following the first-instance convictions of former KLA leaders. He therefore believes that the PDK, which insisted on the adoption of the legislation and is now seeking its return to parliament for “further revision”, should provide well-founded reasons for its move.

“Given that they launched this initiative, it would have been better if they had not been the only ones involved, but if all political entities, all of Kosovo and its institutions had taken part. That would have carried considerably greater political, legal and diplomatic weight,” Baraliu said.

Baraliu reiterated that, regardless of whether the amendments were well drafted, the PDK should clarify why it had returned the law and explain why this was causing delays for Kosovo, its institutions and the established Working Group tasked with drafting a strategy for the defense of former KLA leaders, Kosovo Press reported.

According to him, it is clear that there are inconsistencies with the Constitution, meaning that some provisions lack sufficiently substantiated arguments to carry legal weight, whether in the context of European integration or before the court itself.

“We are in a situation in which the EU has reacted, and the court, whose president claims it is independent, has also taken a position, even though it operates within Kosovo's judicial system. There were requirements that had to be met. However, at times, political influence carries considerable weight at a crucial political moment. The situation was urgent, and citizens' demands were pressing and strong, so the amendments were adopted. Any subsequent improvements may have limited legal effect,” Baraliu argued.