The fact that Erion Veliaj continues to hold the office of mayor of Tirana while in prison has revived a debate that touches not only on legality, but also on the way politics uses institutions to the very end. In a television face-off, the discussion quickly shifted from the question of whether Veliaj should step down to calculations over whom his resignation would serve.
The position that sparked the debate
During the discussion, Kejdi said that, in his judgment, Veliaj deserves to be in prison, but should not resign from the post of mayor.
According to this argument, his departure would serve the political interests of Prime Minister Edi Rama, so keeping the post is seen as a way to frustrate the head of government.
Clash with the argument of the law
Lecturer Ervis Iljazaj opposed this logic, raising precisely the issue of institutional standards and violation of the law.
He described it as unacceptable that the administration of Tirana, where about one-third of the country’s population lives, should continue from prison solely because of a political calculation against Rama.
Between the public interest and the battle of camps
The debate highlighted a broader problem in Albanian politics: when issues affecting the functioning of public institutions are reduced to calculations between sides, citizens’ interests are pushed into the background.
In this case, the question is no longer only whether Veliaj should remain in office or not, but also whether a municipality like Tirana can be treated as an instrument in the internal political struggle.
An issue that remains publicly open
On one side is the political argument that a resignation could be used by opponents or former allies to redistribute power. On the other stands the clear institutional problem: how legitimate and how functional is the leadership of the Municipality of Tirana by an official who is in prison.
It is precisely this clash between political morality, the law and the public interest that is keeping the issue at the center of debate.
Beyond the statements made in the studio, the core remains the same: when the standard for leading a major institution is measured by political usefulness rather than clear rules, the cost falls on the administration of the city and public trust.