Albania’s Constitutional Court has rejected the Democratic Party’s request over the election of Endrit Shabani to lead the Ombudsman institution, leaving in force the vote held in Parliament. The decision closes the legal battle for now, but not the political questions that surrounded the process.
The Democratic Party’s request did not succeed at the Constitutional Court
Democratic Party lawmakers had challenged Shabani’s appointment and turned to the Constitutional Court to overturn it. With its ruling, the court did not side with the opposition.
What the opposition was contesting
According to the claims raised by the opposition, the procedure followed for the election of the Ombudsman had been contrary to the Constitution. Objections were also raised over Endrit Shabani’s compatibility with the position he assumed.
The Democratic Party has treated the issue as a procedural and institutional problem, calling into question not only the final vote, but also the way the candidacy was administered.
How the vote was held in Parliament
Endrit Shabani was elected by Parliament with 85 votes in favor on December 11. Despite the opposition’s objections, his candidacy received the support of the majority in the plenary session.
This vote became the central point of the political clash, as the opposition considered the process compromised, while the majority pushed it forward without real consensus.
Withdrawal of signatures and political clash
The clash began after the Democratic Party withdrew its signatures for the Ombudsman candidates, including for Endrit Shabani, declaring that he no longer had its support.
However, this withdrawal did not stop the vote in Parliament. In the end, the majority approved Shabani’s name, while the opposition shifted the battle to the Constitutional Court, without managing to change the outcome.
The Constitutional Court’s decision legally consolidates Shabani’s position in office, although the debate over procedural standards remains open on the political level.
In essence, the case brings back into focus the way independent institutions are chosen in Parliament: through real competition and transparency, or simply with the votes held by the majority.