Pavkovic: Constitutional Court should determine whether MPs who are also Government members are in violation of the law

Milos Pavkovic, Director of Strategy at the Center for European Policy, believes that the Constitutional Court should decide whether Kosovo's caretaker prime minister and ministers, who are simultaneously members of parliament, are in violation of the law. He adds that, given the current situation and the postponement of the process of constituting the Kosovo Assembly, the court would probably determine that constitutional principles have been violated.

Pavkovic recalls that the legality of decisions made by the caretaker government has been questioned repeatedly since last year, when the situation was similar, as decisions were also being adopted at that time that effectively exceeded the government's mandate.

“The constitution of parliament is being postponed again, while those serving as caretaker prime minister or ministers are simultaneously members of parliament. If we look strictly at the letter of the Constitution, they are in some form of violation. However, the final decision should be made by the Constitutional Court of Kosovo, as the highest authority for interpreting that document,” Pavkovic told Kosovo Online.

Therefore, he says, one would expect the opposition or another institution to refer the matter to the Constitutional Court so that this judicial body can make a final ruling on the issue.

He notes that the constitutional deadline for constituting parliament has already been exceeded, which means that the ministers are remaining in their caretaker roles not only by force of law, but also by their own political choice.

“That is why this issue is now becoming relevant: whether there is an intention to extend the caretaker government's mandate beyond the existing constitutional deadlines,” Pavkovic points out.

He also explains that one question is whether exceeding the constitutional deadlines means that the caretaker mandate also comes to an end, while a separate question concerns what decisions a caretaker government is permitted to make.

He recalled that last year, during the election campaign, the caretaker government allocated funds to citizens and adopted a revised budget, which certainly exceeded the powers of a government in that status.

“What is disputed now is the postponement of the process, and that is a matter for the Constitutional Court. It is likely that the court would rule that constitutional principles have been violated in this case,” Pavkovic said.