The debate over salaries in the justice system has returned with sharp political overtones. Prime Minister Edi Rama reacted again on social media, where he opposed judges’ demand for a pay rise and presented it as a claim that, according to him, would push the gap to unjustifiable levels compared with the administration and the country’s top state officials.
The figures the government is presenting in the middle of the debate
According to the version made public by Rama, the average salary of judges in Albania is currently 280% higher than the average salary in the state administration. He also claims that this salary is around 60% higher than that of judges in Montenegro and North Macedonia.
In the same reaction, the prime minister also compared the salaries of Albanian judges with other countries in the region, saying they are higher than in Croatia, Bulgaria and Serbia. These figures were presented by the head of government as an argument against the requested increase.
What the requested increase would bring, according to Rama
Rama says that if the pay rise request were approved, the average salary of judges would surpass even the levels reported for Greece, Romania and Slovenia. According to him, compared with the Albanian administration, the gap would rise to 470% more.
In direct political language, he described this scenario as unacceptable, presenting it as a burden being sought outside Parliament’s decision-making. His reaction comes in a climate where the clash over public funds is moving increasingly openly between branches of power.
Comparison with the President and ministers
A highlighted part of the reaction concerns the hierarchy of salaries in the state. According to Rama, with the requested increase, the average salary of the judiciary would become about 1,000 euros higher than the President’s salary and 2,200 euros higher than a minister’s salary.
He adds that at the highest salary level in the judicial system, the gap is already larger today: approximately 2,000 euros above the President and 3,000 euros above a minister. According to the prime minister, if the requested increase were implemented, this gap would widen even further.
The clash reaches the criminal complaint
At the end of his reaction, Rama linked the salary debate with the criminal complaint that judges’ associations have filed against the Finance Minister and treasury officials in the country. He used this element to present the conflict not simply as a salary debate, but as a clash over how funds can be drawn from the treasury.
On the other hand, the government’s reaction at this stage does not provide a full institutional clarification of the legal basis of the conflict, beyond the political accusation against the judges’ request. This keeps the debate open between the propaganda of figures and the real issue of how salaries are regulated in a system that must also guarantee the independence of justice.
The clash between the executive and the judiciary is unfolding publicly with strong figures and even stronger tones. So far, the government has chosen to treat the issue mainly as a problem of disproportion with the administration and the top of the state, while the legal core of the conflict remains the subject of confrontation.
In this debate, the question is not only how much judges are paid, but also who decides, by what procedure, and how far the clash between branches of power can go when public money is at stake.