Rakic Andric: The Assembly may be constituted even before a Constitutional Court ruling, with procedures potentially corrected subsequently

Milica Andric Rakic, Programme Manager at the NGO New Social Initiative, assesses that the new term of the Assembly of Kosovo may be constituted even before the Constitutional Court issues its decision on the appeal filed by the Serb List regarding the election of a Deputy Speaker of Parliament from the Serbian community, with the possibility that certain procedures could subsequently be corrected after the ruling is published, should they be found to have been improper.

The Serb List filed its appeal in October, after Nenad Rasic—who did not have the support of the majority of Serbian MPs—was elected Deputy Speaker in the previous parliamentary term.

Given the prolonged wait for the Court’s decision, Andric Rakic says it is possible that the ruling may arrive before the start of the constitution of the new parliamentary term; however, even if it does not, she believes the constitution of the Assembly will proceed.

“If, for example, the constitution of the Assembly proceeds in the same way as in the previous term—by selecting Nenad Rasic by drawing lots for Deputy Speaker—and a Constitutional Court decision stating that this was not a proper method arrives afterward, I believe the procedure for electing the Deputy Speaker would simply be repeated,” our interlocutor says.

Bearing in mind last year’s experience, when the previous Assembly was constituted and the Constitutional Court did not impose interim measures, she assumes that the constitution will now proceed in a similar manner.

“Last time, a significant part of the legal complications surrounding the constitution of the Assembly was deliberately generated in order to delay elections until the most favorable moment for Self-Determination. Now they will complete this election quickly, unless for some reason they have an interest in delaying the process again. The timing of the publication of the Constitutional Court’s decision does not affect the constitution process in any way, because the Assembly can be constituted even before the decision, with certain procedures potentially corrected afterward,” Andric Rakic believes.

Had the Court believed there were serious violations of regulations, she notes, it would have issued interim measures last year and prohibited Assembly decisions until a final ruling was rendered—but it did not do so.

According to her, the Court should clarify the procedure for drawing lots.

“The question is whether the Court considers that, if the Serb List proposed its nine representatives and all were voted on three times and each was rejected by a majority of MPs, and the List does not wish to propose a tenth candidate—in this case Nenad Rasic—this constitutes a refusal of candidature, and whether in such a situation it is permissible to move to a draw. If the Court believes that, in such a case, it is permissible to proceed to a draw and, through that procedure, arrive at the tenth candidate whom a majority of MPs then selects, then procedurally there is no problem from the Court’s perspective. Therefore, this is the only additional clarification of procedures we can realistically expect at this point regarding how a Deputy Speaker is elected,” Andric Rakic explains.