E fundit!

20:45 TODAY

"The end has come for you"/ Protesters unfurl banner on the walls of the Polytechnic

After an intervention that appeared to create an obstacle,...

Balla "challenged" the MP/ Arben Malaj criticizes the SP: Rilindja is showing its face, a political gathering without integrity

2026-06-29 17:57:00, Politikë CNA

Balla "challenged" the MP/ Arben Malaj criticizes the SP: Rilindja is

Former Minister of Finance, Arben Malaj, has reacted after statements made this morning by the head of the Socialist Party Parliamentary Group, Taulant Balla, regarding the mandate of the MP who left the SP, Marjana Koçeku.

"He doesn't know how to respect those who elected him, to hand over his mandate"/ Balla "challenges" the MP
June 29, 11:45

Through a post on social media, Malaj expresses critical views towards this political force, saying that through its recent stances it is showing its true face.

Malaj does not hesitate to call it a political group without integrity, which, according to him, operates with the mindset of daily producing enemies.

Full post:

The Renaissance is showing its true face, as a political group without integrity and with a mentality that produces enemies every day.

Only in organizations with mafia rules do you have to think carefully when you suddenly leave them.

The Rilindatists no longer kill you with weapons, but with aggressive and contemptuous digital attacks, which are more serious than a "sweet political death."

This is why the MP is absolutely right. The Venice Commission and the Constitution clarify and guarantee that, from a constitutional perspective, the mandate is only individual.

This is one of the sharpest and most frequent debates in constitutional law and political ethics, especially in closed-list electoral systems, where the voter votes primarily for the party logo and not directly for the candidate's name.

In this clash between mainly two principles, here is how the legal and moral arguments divide:

1. Legal and Constitutional Perspective (Why the MP is not obliged to submit it)

From a legal perspective, party leaders have no legal mechanism to remove the MP's mandate.

Free mandate: The Constitution of Albania (Article 74) and the principles of the Venice Commission sanction that the mandate of the deputy is free and not representative (imperative).

The MP represents the people, not simply the party that put him on the list.

Protection from party dictates:

This constitutional principle was created precisely so that MPs would not be "slaves" to the will of the party leader.

If a member of parliament finds that the party is breaking promises, the Constitution gives him the right to vote and act according to his conscience, without fear that the party may take away his mandate.

2. The Party's Moral Viewpoint (Why Surrender is Required)

The party leaders' argument is based on the morality of the closed list system:

Lack of a nominal vote: In a closed list, the MP did not compete with her name to collect preferential votes from citizens. Votes were cast for the program, the chairman, and the logo of the Socialist Party.

"Ownership" of the mandate: The party argues that the mandate is a product of the structures, financing, campaigning and propaganda of the entire organization. Therefore, leaving with the entire mandate is seen as "stealing" the vote of the socialists who voted for the party, and not the individual.

3. The MP's Moral Counter-Argument (New Legitimacy)

On the other hand, the MP has an equally strong moral argument for retaining her mandate:

Betrayal of voters comes from the party, not the MP:

If the party has abandoned the electoral promises with which it won votes, the MP can declare that she is staying in parliament precisely to remain faithful to those promises as an independent.

Protection of the social contract:

Surrendering the mandate would mean replacing her with the next dummy from the party list, who would blindly vote for the violation of promises.

Maintaining the mandate, in this case, serves as an act of resistance and protection for citizens who were lied to by the official program.

Even though party leaders will morally label it as "treason" or "undeserved independence" due to the closed list, the Constitution and parliamentary law protect the MP.

If the party has deviated from its promises, its decision to become independent aligns with the essence of the MP's mission:

to be a representative of the people and their conscience,

not a simple number on the mayor's card. /CNA