In a post on his social media account, Rama recalled that his lawsuit was filed in 2018, and it took the court seven years to reach the conclusion that “the plaintiff has not suffered any harm, as he still holds the position of Prime Minister,” and that the defamation “has not affected public perception of him.”

“This reasoning didn’t come from a comedy novel, but from a court—and not from the author of The Good Soldier Švejk, but from a judge who earns more than a teacher or a doctor, paid with Albanian taxpayers’ money,” Rama said. “That alone is something to cry about, not laugh at. And when you realize that this judge is part of a union asking the Constitutional Court for a 700-euro pay raise, the crying turns into mourning.”

While describing the decision as a “judicial satire,” Rama expressed concern by saying, “The real problem is what will happen to far more important cases involving ordinary people, which depend on the reasoning of this judge or others like her, whose thinking is below that of a 12-year-old.”

Below is Prime Minister Rama’s full statement:

“Today, the Tirana First Instance Court dismissed my defamation lawsuit against Luli from 2018, a case for which it took the judge seven years to conclude that I, ‘as the plaintiff, have not suffered any harm, since I still hold the position of Prime Minister, and the statements’—meaning Luli’s defamation—’have not affected the public’s perception of me’!!!”

So according to the judge, Luli didn’t defame me—since his defamation wasn’t enough to remove me from office!!!

This reasoning did not come from a satire book but from a court—and not from the author of The Good Soldier Švejk, but from a judge who earns more than a teacher or a doctor, paid by Albanian taxpayers. This is a matter to weep over, not to laugh at. Moreover, considering that this judge belongs to a union demanding a 700-euro salary increase from the Constitutional Court, the sadness turns into mourning.

When you add to this judicial absurdity the serious concern about how justice will be served in far more important cases entrusted to such a judge, one cannot help but ask: Will the judiciary’s government—its advisors, inspectors, and hundreds of well-paid administrative staff—finally awaken from their slumber and hold those responsible accountable, ensuring that ordinary citizens’ rights are properly protected in court?

To be clear, the main issue isn’t just how one judge handled a defamation case—particularly when the defamer is not taken seriously even by a pair of untied shoes

Here, the real concern is what will happen to far more important cases involving people, which depend on the judgment of this judge or others like her, whose level of logic is below that of a 12-year-old!!!

/m.m//a.f/sm/