By ALBA à‡ELA
2016 will be the year when most of the news and debates will be defined by these two words ‘justice reform’.
There have never been so many expectations about something going on in Albania as there are now from both domestic and international actors when it comes to the justice reform. The overblown or aggressive epithets describing an action in Albania range from “earthquake-inducing” to “opening the gates of Europe.” Ambassadors of western states in Albania have also contributed to this unusual climate of hope and revolution with strong and explicit public declarations and actions. The reform is one of the key preconditions to the opening of the negotiations, the next step in Albania’s path to European Union accession, watched closely by the EU Commission and most of the member states embassies in Tirana.
The justice reform is unarguably a necessity for Albania, a country where subsequent polls reveal that the public believes this is a corrupt sector that has stopped delivering justice to citizens and is under the orders and bribes of politicians and criminals alike. The consensus from the opposition as well within the ruling coalition for the reform remains fragile at best. Yet the reform from as much as we know so far (and it’s not enough!) is arguably another legislative and institutional-design action in a country described as equipped with all the necessary laws and institutions but lacking in implementation. The information provided to the public about it is so far regarding disputes about formulas about judge selection and composition of high judicial bodies.
Most importantly, more information is needed by citizens to understand how the reform will tackle the main problems and how it will provide mechanism to fight corruption in the ranks of the courts. The distinct element of introducing some form of foreign oversight mechanism as it is now the case in the draft of the reform (in the form of a commission with foreign members) needs to be discussed more openly as it is essentially a form of subtle compromise with sovereignty.
The reform will most likely require constitutional changes which in turn need wider consensus from both elected officials and voters. This makes the need for clarity even more pressing.
The main public debate actors are using grandiose words to describe what will happen, probably with the aim of inducing the public to believe that there will be a true revolution in one of the most hated and controversial sectors of public life. However citizens don’t need this words, they need to see clearly how the new laws will be efficient, how the new institutional designs will guarantee what the old ones didn’t.
Having a reasonably independent and accountable justice system, one of the unnegotiable cornerstones of the modern democratic and functional state, is a truly national cause just like European integration.
The hyperboles are simply not helping it, more accurate, comprehensive and analytical information might just do so!
