TIRANA, Dec 12 /ATA/ The chief justice of the Constitutional Court, Holta Zaçaj, convened a meeting of the judges on Thursday to announce the completion of her term, stating that the Constitutional Court must remain free from political and media pressure to ensure that its role as the guardian of constitutional principles is strong and credible.
In a media statement on Thursday afternoon, Holta Zaçaj explained that, due to the unprecedented media attacks against her personally as chief justice of the Constitutional Court, she is providing the public with information regarding the duration of her term in office.
Zaçaj informed that by Decision No. 19, dated 10.03.2017, the Constitutional Court declared the expiry of Judge Vitore Tusha’s term, which provided the legal basis for the appointing body to announce the procedures for the election of the successor.
Due to the announcement and re-announcement of the call for nominees by the High Court, in its capacity as the final appointing body, after completing the evaluation and ranking procedures of the candidates, the Judicial Appointments Council has submitted to the High Court the list of ranked candidates, along with the corresponding report and documentation.
The Special Meeting of the Judges of the High Court, held on January 16, 2023, decided to elect Zaçaj as a member of the Constitutional Court with a partial mandate, until the renewal process is completed in 2025.
Zaçaj explained that on January 25 of this year, she began her duties as a member of the Constitutional Court after taking the oath before the President of the Republic.
“I would like to clarify that I am not a substitute judge for Judge Vitore Tusha, meaning I was not elected within her 9-year term, which she completed in its entirety as stipulated by the constitutional provisions (for the full 9 years). Although she chose to remain in office until her successor was appointed, this is allowed for a constitutional judge under the provisions of Article 125, paragraph 7, of the Constitution, in order to ensure the Court’s functioning,” she explained.
“I was appointed to a new constitutional term, which, due to objective reasons and procedural delays, started later than anticipated. However, as an exception to the standard 9-year term duration, it was established as limited due to the specific provision in Article 179, paragraph 3, of the Constitution,” Zaçaj added.
She points out that Article 125 of the Constitution stipulates that a judge of the Constitutional Court serves a 9-year term without the right to reappointment, unless the Constitution itself sets a different date or imposes a limitation on the constitutional term.
“Therefore, the time limitation of my term comes directly from the Constitution itself, not from any hypothetical interruption in the middle of the term of Judge Vitore Tusha, as is being criticized in the media. It is the term of that judge which ran out on March 10, 2017. This date does not determine either the start or the end of the term of her successor, which is fundamentally a constitutional term that runs out in 2025 (as stated above in Article 179, paragraph 3),” Zaçaj continued.
Continuing her arguments, she stated that at the time of her candidacy, she was unaware and acknowledged that she was competing for an incomplete term, which, according to the constitutional provision, would end in 2025.
“Given the public position of the High Court dated December 6, 2024, and based on the fact that the constitutional provision and the decision of my appointment as a member of the Constitutional Court did not specify a date but only the year in which the term of office would end, I decided on December 10, 2024, to address the Venice Commission to request an amicus curiae opinion. This decision was made not only because the issues at hand involve constitutional principles that have been previously discussed by the Venice Commission, but also because these matters carry public interest and will serve the Court in the future, as well as to avoid constitutional disputes that may arise from interpretations of constitutional norms that might conflict with the principles and competencies enshrined in the fundamental law,” Zaçaj stated.
On the other hand, according to her, the High Court has not indicated the legal basis that determines whether the completion date of the predecessor judge’s term (the day and month) is the reference date for the completion of the successor judge’s term as well.
According to Zaçaj, it is clearly evident that the Constitutional Court has not been allowed to exercise its competence, and the High Court has acted in open contradiction to the provisions of Article 127, paragraph 2, of the Constitution, which states that “The end of a Constitutional Court judge’s term is declared by a decision of the Constitutional Court.”
She emphasized, “The High Court’s announcement of the vacancy, without a ruling from the Constitutional Court, has stripped the latter of its constitutional authority. This unprecedented move was made in haste, with no public interest or force majeure to justify immediate action.”
Zaçaj states that, in the interest of the public, to protect the institution she leads and to avoid constitutional disputes, she has decided today to address the Judges’ Assembly to announce the completion of her term as a constitutional judge.
In concluding her statement, Zaçaj expressed that the security of the constitutional term is essential for democracy itself.
/sm/
