A Dutch media outlet has taken aim at the silence of European institutions and political groups over the case of Erion Veliaj, raising the question of whether Albania is being treated by a different standard when it comes to the rule of law and its aspiration to join the European Union.
Comparison with Turkey and the question of standards
The article opens with the 2025 case in Turkey, when the arrest of Ekrem İmamoğlu, one of Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s main rivals, prompted immediate reactions in the European Parliament. According to this position, the Socialists and Democrats quickly raised concerns about democracy, the rule of law and Turkey’s relationship with the EU.
It then asks why a similar reaction has not been seen in the case of Erion Veliaj, who according to the article has been held in pretrial detention for 18 months on suspicion of corruption. While it stresses that the fight against corruption is necessary, the commentary questions the proportionality of this measure and the legal safeguards that should apply to an elected local official before a final decision is reached.
Silence in the European social democratic camp
The focus is especially on the lack of reaction from the S&D group, which according to the Dutch media reacted strongly to İmamoğlu’s case, but not to Veliaj’s. This difference is presented as a political and institutional test of how rule-of-law principles are applied.
The article also mentions specific names of Social Democratic members of the European Parliament and asks why the same questions were not raised about pretrial detention, political independence and legal protection in the Albanian case. Along the same lines, CDA MEP Jeroen Lenaers is also mentioned as part of the LIBE committee, where according to this argument there should have been more scrutiny and more questions for a candidate country such as Albania.
Rama, the political climate and the doubts being raised
The article also gives the issue a political reading, saying that Prime Minister Edi Rama is under pressure in domestic politics and that the absence of an important rival from the political center of Tirana removes at least one burden from him.
This is the author’s political interpretation and not a procedurally proven fact. Nevertheless, the very raising of this thesis shows that the Veliaj case is being read outside Albania not only as a criminal matter, but also as a test of the real independence of institutions and the line between justice and political interest.
The Netherlands’ role and support for SPAK
An important part of the commentary is linked to the Netherlands’ involvement in supporting SPAK. According to the article, the Netherlands has helped strengthen this structure’s investigative capacities, day-to-day operations and structural efficiency, while the EU has also supported it financially with millions of euros.
For precisely this reason, the Dutch media argues that support for the fight against corruption should not translate into a lack of critical oversight. According to this view, the greater the political and financial involvement of European partners, the greater the demand should be for transparency, proportionality and respect for legal safeguards.
A debate that directly affects the integration process
At its core, the commentary raises a question that goes beyond Veliaj’s name: is Europe applying the same standards when an elected official is deprived of liberty before a final conviction? According to the author, this is a serious test of the credibility of the European debate on the rule of law.
In this context, Albania is presented as a country seeking to move forward toward the EU, while question marks remain over the practical functioning of legal protection and institutional independence. This makes the issue more sensitive than an ordinary diplomatic debate, especially when positive assessments from European officials are not accompanied by the same sharpness of public questioning in problematic cases.
The main message of this position is that the rule of law is not tested only when it comes to clear political opponents in countries outside the EU, but also when difficult questions emerge on the threshold of European enlargement.
Precisely where institutions seek trust, even greater critical scrutiny is required.