ISP attacks the CEC, is it in a conflict of interest?

2025-06-09 09:22:00, Aktualitet CNA

In a statement issued a day earlier, the ISP, among other things, attacked the CEC and the CEC bodies that the ISP calls governing bodies.

The ISP's claims relate to what someone at the ISP calls different readings of the provisions of the Electoral Code.

It is not clearly understood what the "alla ISP" doctrine means with the different reading of the provisions of the Electoral Code.

The CEC has 3 bodies that pursue different functions.

The State Election Commissioner has full functions as the head of the CEC administration and also has decision-making functions in the implementation of the Electoral Code, as well as proposing measures for administrative violations to the Complaints Review Commission. The Commissioner implements the rules established by the Regulatory Commission and proposes amendments or improvements to the rules.

On the other hand, the ISP is a civil society organization that has the right to denounce and request administrative measures against electoral subjects and not only. This quality makes the ISP a party to the administrative review processes within the CEC.

Complaining about the bodies that have reviewed your complaints is legitimate, but drafting reports and statements about the bodies in which you were a party as a complainant is a conflict of interest.

It is the same as if a lawyer representing a party in court also prepares reports evaluating the work of the Judge. He should do this even in those cases, but especially in those cases where the judge has issued a decision against the complainant.

A party to an administrative review always has procedural rights to appeal. But the appeal is not made through reports that are published in the press, but through judicial appeals.

The ISP has not forwarded any complaints to the Electoral College regarding CEC decisions.

What does ISP claim with the same reading of the provisions?

For all levels of administrative and judicial review to certify what the person complaining wrote? This would be a unified reading for the ISP?

Why has the ISP not complained to the Electoral College to serve the unification of the reading of the provisions, but instead makes statements in the service of delegitimizing the CEC bodies?

This stance, accompanied by complaints made through public statements, places the goodwill of the Organization led by Afrim Krasniqi in question, who, in addition to his position as unrivaled leader in the ISP, also exercises other advisory functions paid from the state budget.

Below is part of the statement distributed by the ISP.

"ISP assesses that the CEC should unify its positions and decisions regarding the same cases, the same practices, the same complaints and the same provisions of the Electoral Code. These are the third elections to be held under this legal basis and the governing bodies of the CEC make different interpretations of the provisions and illegal phenomena reported."/ CNA