[ad_1]
Analyst Andi Bushati has described as unserious the way the Constitutional Court adjudicates the issue of the decision to dismiss or not President Ilir Meta.
He emphasizes that the parliament that made the decision as an organized gang of bandits should be investigated and should not enter into the issue at all whether the president has committed a violation or not.
“That of the Constitutional Court is not the most prefect decision. To manage to justify a parliament that has done bandit procedures and to say that this procedure of the desolate Gramoz Ruçi to sign papers that turn out to be three different. “A serious Constitutional Court would not enter into the issue at all whether it has committed violations or not, but the parliament would be reduced as an organized gang and not an assembly of the republic”, said Bushati.
“The authorities here in our country are crazy, so much so that every person who does the most minimal act seems to be doing the great deed. The Albanians were killed with forks, because there must be consequences for you to act. “You have to have an extraterrestrial mind to connect the president’s visit with that.”added Bushati.
He appeared very critical of the “Constitutional”, saying that he had no intention of overturning the ‘halabake’ procedure of the Albanian parliament.
“We have invented a kind of renaissance that loves America more than it loves itself. “If we had to make the criticism today, there were no steps to overthrow the halabak procedure of the Albanian parliament”, said Bushati.
We recall that the Constitutional Court decided not to dismiss President Ilir Meta.
In its notification, the Constitutional Court explains that “after verifying the procedure followed by the Assembly for the establishment of the commission of inquiry, guaranteeing the right of the President to be heard and defended and taking into account the organizational independence of the Assembly, in the whole ascertained that there was no constitutional violation during this procedure ”.
During the process, the legal advisers of the Head of State relied in particular on their defense, precisely on the serious violations that, according to them, had been committed by the parliament from the moment of reviewing the request of the deputies that set the parliament in motion, until decision.
On the other hand, the violations alleged by the representatives of the socialist majority, for the Constitutional Court can not be considered as serious violations of the Constitution.
top channel
[ad_2]
Source link
