The clash over amendments to the Penal Code has shifted from legal argument to political accusation. The Democratic Party reacted sharply to Edi Rama’s proposals, claiming that the prime minister is not seeking to correct abuse of pretrial detention, but to build a law that serves his own interests.
Bardhi: Rama has used prison as a political response
According to PD parliamentary group chairman Gazment Bardhi, Edi Rama’s approach to the Penal Code is not linked to protecting freedoms, but to an old governing model in which criminal punishment has been used as the shortest route to cover up political failures.
In the opposition’s reaction, Rama is presented as the politician who, from his first day in power, pushed the logic of “more prison” on various issues, from illegal construction and electricity to undeclared work and measures during the pandemic. The PD argues that this long history of harsher criminal policy makes the prime minister’s current turn on pretrial detention unconvincing.
The 2014 electricity operation returns to the spotlight
In its political attack on Rama, the PD cited as an example October 2014, when during the electricity operation more than 1,000 people were arrested in the first months. The opposition reads that period as proof of a governing philosophy that treated prison as the first instrument rather than the last resort.
In this context, the tragic case of Qamil Zela, 52, a father of three, was also mentioned. He remained in pretrial detention for two months over an obligation of 35,000 old lek, and on December 28, 2014, he hanged himself in his cell. For the PD, this case remains one of the gravest episodes calling into question the government’s current narrative on standards of freedom and proportionality.
PD refers to the Council of Europe’s warning
The opposition recalls that the alarm over excessive use of pretrial detention is not new. According to the PD’s argument, the Council of Europe had raised concern in the first months of Rama’s government and had recommended that pretrial detention be used only as a last resort.
The reaction mentions January 16, 2014, when the Council of Europe warned of “excessive reliance on pretrial detention.” It also cites that from October 2013 to February 2014, the number of pretrial detainees had doubled, reaching around 2,300 people, approximately 40% of the prison population. According to the PD, this shows the problem had long been known and that political responsibility cannot be hidden behind a belated discovery.
Political accusation: the turn came only after Veliaj’s arrest
The core of the opposition’s accusation is that Edi Rama did not change his position because of principles, but because of circumstances. According to the PD, the prime minister began talking about “imprisonment without trial” and the possibility of being tried while free only after the arrest of Erion Veliaj in February 2025.
Bardhi goes on to present this as a move of political self-protection, claiming that Rama is now tailoring a law “to fit himself.” The PD’s accusation goes further into the realm of political suspicion, suggesting that the changes do not stem from concern for citizens unjustly held in pretrial detention, but from fear that the new investigative climate could strike closer to the center of power.
Beyond the harsh political language, the debate is once again putting at the center an issue that has produced concrete consequences for years: the use of pretrial detention and the relationship between the penal state and fundamental rights.
What remains to be seen is whether the proposals on the Penal Code will be accompanied by real guarantees against abuse, or whether they will once again be used as an instrument of the moment in the clash between those in power and their opponents.