"The problem is not me"/ Peleshi: An antagonistic and divisive spirit brought us to this session

2025-10-30 11:13:00, Politikë CNA

"The problem is not me"/ Peleshi: An antagonistic and divisive spirit

The Speaker of the Assembly, Niko Peleshi, took the floor in the session where the DP's request for his dismissal is being discussed. Peleshi began his speech with the murder of the judge and the solidarity that his killer received on social networks. He said that he chose this example to show that speeches in the Assembly are one of the drivers of citizen reactions in reactions on social networks.

The Speaker said that what brought this motion to debate is the divisive spirit, while emphasizing that it is not the specific cause of the DP's request. Peleshi stated that this motion was brought about by his resistance to not allowing anyone to change the rules of the parliamentary hall. He emphasized that the Constitution, the regulations or parliamentary tradition guarantee the rights of the deputy and not the abuse of these rights.

"A few weeks ago, a serious event occurred. A judge was shot to death in the courtroom. From that moment on, an even more serious event appeared, and on social networks there was a significant number of reactions that expressed solidarity with the perpetrator of the crime. Perhaps now someone is asking: what does this have to do with this procedure for the dismissal of the Speaker of the Assembly? Be patient.

I will respond to the real cause of this procedure and not the consequence. The real cause is not me. It is not favoring one side over another. The majority spoke for 291 minutes against 439 minutes of the opposition (i.e. 60% of the time). The cause that has brought us to this procedure is the antagonistic and divisive spirit from which we cannot give up. It is not a violation of the rules or the Constitution. It is just a label used intentionally wrongly.

Because the rules do not allow you to insult, curse, accuse, block the podium, obstruct the speech of other MPs, or decide not to implement disciplinary measures.

What about the Constitution? You are unlikely to care about the Constitution of the Republic, respect it and read it carefully, if you are ready to throw it in the air and even use the Constitution book as a stone on the head of your political opponent. The problem is not me, but the lack of will to engage in a new political behavior. In real, not false, respect for the Constitution, the rules and parliamentary tradition. The Constitution, the rules and parliamentary tradition guarantee the rights of the deputy, but also prohibit the abuse of the right.

Abuse of the right should be the red line where our right to speak and be heard ends. If we agree on this, as the Constitution and the regulations - the letter and the spirit, the ambition and the European standard of parliamentarism - actually oblige us - then we will no longer face ugly situations that make it impossible to hold the session. But apparently it is not that simple. In this motion for the dismissal of the Speaker of the Assembly, we have been brought by the resistance to not allow anyone, in the position that I have the honor to hold today, to dare to change this hall from an arena of verbal violence to an arena of alternative thoughts and constructive politics.

Or discourage the personalism of political discourse, as part of the culture from which we must separate ourselves. So let us clothe this hall, where I have also been a part for years now, with real and often unspoken responsibilities. This culture that is cultivated here kills. It kills the hopes of young people. It kills faith in tomorrow. It kills optimism. And as harsh as it may sound to our ears, I will say it: This culture of hatred here also has its share in violence in society!

We must face this uncomfortable truth: Parliament does not simply reflect society; it shapes it. Every word spoken in this chamber echoes beyond these walls. When citizens turn on their televisions or scroll through their phones, they see us, their elected representatives, engaged in political discourse. Whether we admit it or not, for better or worse, we are teaching them how democracy works, how we should behave when we disagree, how we should react when we feel our rights are being violated. When we engage in derogatory personal attacks, when we shout at each other, when we treat opponents as enemies rather than as common servants of the public good, we normalize these behaviors.

We tell our constituents that this is how you should act when you don’t like someone else’s opinion or decision. The degradation of parliamentary discourse creates a cascading effect throughout society. When we use inflammatory language, it becomes the vocabulary of dinner table arguments and social media comments. When we demonize those who hold different views, we give our neighbors permission to view each other with hostility. When we manipulate with half-truths or slander, we erode the common foundation of facts on which public debate should rest. The rising incidence of hate speech, the growing polarization within communities, the declining willingness to engage in dialogue across political divides are phenomena that do not occur in a vacuum.

They flourish in the soil that we have nurtured with our example. We have transformed parliament from a democratic forum into an arena of war. The sessions that have degraded into physical clashes, throwing objects and words at each other, are in fact evidence of our inability to detach ourselves from this culture. Your reaction with this motion is nothing more than an attempt to put the Speaker of the Assembly under the pressure of the past.

So, to continue the continuation. I thank you for giving me the opportunity to explain once again: I will try and do everything in my power to make this Parliament more and more like a European Parliament. Of course, not alone, but with all those deputies, old or young, from all sides of politics, who have the will to look towards the future of Albania in the EU. What I have not allowed myself in my entire political life, and which coincides with the spirit and letter of our regulation and code of conduct, left on paper, I, within my legal and legitimate right, have no way of allowing for others." , said Peleshi.