
Erion Veliaj's international lawyers have reacted after the latest decision of the Constitutional Court.
They state that the Constitutional Court assessed that the High Court did not conduct a full review of the decision to release Veliaj, as required by the Constitution.
In response, they say they expect the Supreme Court to conduct the review requested by the Constitutional Court.
Daniel J. Fetterman, senior international advisor to Mayor Veliaj and partner at Kasowitz, gave this statement:
"The Constitutional Court deserves praise for its careful, independent and principled implementation of the Constitution of Albania. This is the second decision where the Constitutional Court recognizes significant constitutional deficiencies in the treatment that the State has meted out to Mayor Veliaj."
The Constitutional Court has performed precisely the function entrusted to it by the Constitution of Albania: ensuring that, even in cases involving public officials and allegations of criminal conduct, constitutional guarantees remain fully applicable. Constitutional rights exist precisely to ensure that difficult issues are decided according to law and not according to expediency.
This decision reinforces a principle shared by constitutional democracies across Europe and in the United States: personal liberty cannot be restricted without rigorous judicial review and faithful observance of constitutional guarantees. Now the Constitutional Court has requested precisely that in-depth review, and a member of the Court concluded that the evidence never met the constitutional standard necessary to justify Mayor Veliaj’s detention in the first place. Once the Supreme Court of Albania faithfully carries out the review required by today’s decision, carefully weighs each of the deficiencies identified by the Constitutional Court, and applies the relevant standards, we fully expect it to conclude that Mayor Veliaj’s continued detention cannot be constitutionally sustained and will order his immediate release.
When these constitutional deficiencies are taken into account, together with the publicly identified use of two alleged fictitious plaintiffs whose existence has never been proven, and the participation of a prosecutor who admitted that he lacked the legal qualifications required to hold office, the Albanian judiciary must ultimately be asked to determine whether the cumulative effect of these deficiencies has so compromised the integrity of these processes that the prosecution can proceed in accordance with the guarantees of due process, the Constitution of Albania, and the European Convention on Human Rights.
In conclusion, the rule of law is measured not by constitutional rights written on paper, but by the willingness of independent courts to enforce these rights when their enforcement is most difficult. Independent courts that faithfully apply constitutional principles, without fear or favoritism, are indispensable to democratic governance, public confidence in the administration of justice, and the protection of the fundamental freedoms of every citizen. We remain hopeful that Albania’s judicial institutions will uphold these enduring constitutional principles.”