The opposition’s request to set up a parliamentary investigative commission into the activity of “KAYO” sh.a. has run into the procedural filters of Parliament. In the official reply addressed to Gazment Bardhi, the parliamentary administration acknowledges that there was no consensus in the Conference of Chairpersons, while decision-making has been postponed to a plenary session.
Parliament’s response to the opposition’s request
In the letter returned to the head of the Democratic Party’s Parliamentary Group, Parliament explains the procedural path followed regarding the request to establish an investigative commission for “KAYO” sh.a.
According to the official version, the matter was reviewed at the meeting of the Conference of Chairpersons on September 17, 2026, but no agreement was reached there on the elements of the commission. For this reason, Parliament argues that the request passes to the plenary session for decision-making.
The majority does not move it forward in the September 24 session
The same response states that in the Conference of Chairpersons it was agreed that this request would not be addressed in the September 24 session, but in a subsequent plenary session.
This means that the commission requested by the opposition did not receive even immediate parliamentary consideration, but was left pending, with the argument of procedure and the work calendar.
The formal reasoning: the calendar and election week
According to Parliament’s letter, the following week was not considered suitable for MPs’ activity, in implementation of Article 40/1 of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure and because of the work program during the election period.
The response also mentions the October 5, 2026 session, which, under the same article, is dedicated specifically to discussing issues identified during the week of activity related to the elections.
The issue remains pending for plenary decision-making
For the moment, the political substance of the debate over “KAYO” remains unresolved: the opposition is seeking an investigative commission, while the majority, at least so far, has kept the matter within the procedural framework without a final decision.
In practice, Parliament’s response does not provide a clear date for approving or rejecting the commission, but only confirms that the decision, under the official procedure, must go to a plenary session.
Parliament’s letter presents the delay as a matter of rules and scheduling, but politically the fact remains that the opposition’s request for a parliamentary investigation has not yet been given the green light.
At this stage, the commission on “KAYO” sh.a. remains blocked between the lack of consensus in the Conference of Chairpersons and the wait for a decision in the plenary hall.