Problems identified and main recommendations:
I. Structure of representation. The existence of two parliamentary structures on integration, the Commission of European Integration and the National Council of European Integration (KKIE), with different powers in parliamentary practice, but same leaders is considered problematic. Another complementary structure, the Parliamentary Stabilization-Association Committee is headed by one of the co-chairpersons of KKIE and has almost the same members, rotating in the three main structures, with one of the highest political leaders of the political majority in the parliament being part of the rotation structure. The existing structures are source of procedural and substantive formalism. It affects the planning, reporting, and implementation of work.
II. Legal references. Both commissions and especially the activity of the KKIE, will have to be
reviewed in the future to harmonize the regulatory acts with the current and new parliamentary reality, as well as with the best parliamentary practices related to EU integration. Some of the current provisions in force are confusing, outdated and not feasible, while the new parliamentary challenges require a new approach and a much more active role of the Assembly in this direction. ISP and civil society stand ready to offer concrete recommendations and suggestions.
III. EU Integration as a technical vs a political concept. The monitoring of the acts of the representative parliamentary structures during the last two legislatures highlights the political duality in terms of leadership and representation, as well as the fact that there are few cases when the leaders of KIE and KKIE share the same opinion about the progress of Albania’s reforms towards the EU. The EU Integration is a consensual supra-party process. The political parties do not differ on EU integration as a major objective, but on how to achieve full EU integration, ISP considers the different political points of view informed by differing political interests and assessments as normal. Nonetheless, the level and thrust of political rhetoric in relation to the integration process is often abnormal. Especially KKIE may have to avoid political divisions and create a stable and effective mechanism of parliamentary representation, also due to fact that its composition and nature is more than just political. The responsibility for this lies squarely with its two constituent political parties.
IV. Assembly and executive institutions. Deputies have the right to request information from the executive institutions, to conduct hearings, schedule questions and answer sessions and interpellations. Our monitoring found out that the exercise of these rights is selective and dependent on the political will of the executive power, – an essential deformation from the constitutional concept of parliament as a controlling power over the executive. Continuous access to reliable and new information from the institutions is vital for KIE and KKIE deputies, and the Assembly must guarantee this right.
V. Evaluation reports and the Assembly. The practice of instigating political debates after every important report related to developments in Albania (EC Report, Progress reports, OSCE/ODIHR, State Department, Transparency International reports, etc.), is one of the key elements of parliamentary activity. Each deputy of each parliamentary group can have his or her political take on the content of the reports, but the Assembly does not yet have a strategic institutional approach to guide the debates on these reports that are directly related to its role and responsibilities. This would enable the parliament to adopt resolutions and formulate task for their implementation. This also applies to the most important documents related to integration, including the annual progress report.
VI. Inter-institutional discussion platform. One constructive proposal related to reforming the work of the Assembly, especially of KKIE, towards a new relationship with the interest groups and institutions based on a strategy for a “real discussion platform”. Another complementary suggestion is that the current practice of aligning national legislation to the EU Acquis as the responsibility of the government should be replaced by a more horizontal model to increase the effectiveness of the laws that will be adopted in the future.
VII. Integrity and public trust. The effectiveness of KIE and KKIE is also related to their composition and the role of each deputy or other member, according to the Parliament’s regulations. The ISP has found out and highlighted in its periodic monitoring reports that the parliamentary groups have decided to delegate to this committee even deputies who have no indication of training in EU integration issues, and there are even cases when on some of the MPs exist negative records that are considered an obstacle for Albania for integration. For example, one of the MPs in KIE is indirectly part of an American list of economic sanctions, which cites the legitimacy of his mandate, corruption and connection with organized crime. It remains unacceptable for Albania and the Assembly the fact that it has such low standards of representation and that it has not yet succeeded in delegating to parliamentary representative structures individuals with integrity, who are not absent in the ranks of the two major parliamentary parties.
VIII. Internal organization and transparency. In a forum held with the participation of MPs from KIE and KKIE, some of them raised the concern that they do not have access to the main strategic documents of the structures, periodic reports and other necessary elements of their normal parliamentary activity. The heads of the administrative support services emphasized that documents and reports are regularly made available to deputies, but some of them do not use them and show no interest. Regardless of the accuracy and quality of this relationship, it is clear that both sides will have to have a more professional and active approach and that the parliamentary technical staff of the two structures should provide more documentation and assistance to the constituent deputies of each structure, as and in a wider context, for all MPs.
IX. Legislation and evaluation process in KIE. The fact that only a small number of laws and legal acts are passed for evaluation and review in the KIE is widely considered as a wrong approach and one of the points where a clear change in the institutional behaviour of the government and the Assembly is required in relation to the EU integration process.
X. Plenary sessions in KKIE. The increase in the number of periodic reports, especially from the new institutions of justice, can be considered a positive development and progress, however, it is widely recognized that the Assembly still lacks an effective and long-term mechanism for following up on issues and recommendations, and for converting reporting sessions in more effective contributions to parliament and the country. When the institutions report to the Assembly, including the KKIE, they should feel a special responsibility and not consider this as a routine technical process. The Assembly, including the KIE and the KKIE, can do much more in this field. It can and it should change the situation at hand, first by creating a more effective monitoring and evaluation structure, by giving priority to the constitutional role of the Assembly and not to daily political discourses, as well as by strengthening the concept of accountability.
XI. Transparency and accountability. Over the recent years, the meetings of KIE and KKIE were mainly held online, enabling a wider public to follow them. However, reports and documents from these meetings, as resulting from the monitoring of the ISP, are published either incompletely or with a visible delay on the online pages of the Assembly. The delay in publication or the partial publication, especially of progress reports from important institutions in the EU integration process, weakens the role of the parliament and the concept of public transparency. Transparency also relates to other important data on the composition, meetings, activity of the parliamentary structures. For example, currently (July 2022), the Assembly webpage still displays the composition of the Parliamentary Committee for Stabilisation (KPSA) of the previous legislature, from the years 2017-2019 when the opposition was present in the parliament. This comes as a result of the failure to update the page for at least 3 years. (https://www.parlament.al/Files/Integrimi/Komiteti-Parlamentar-p–r-Stabilizim.pdf).
XII. Assembly and civil society. The leaders of KIE and KKIE pursue a policy of cooperation reports with civil society organisations, enabling for the participation of the latter in joint activities and debates. The KKIE includes representatives of civil society in its structure, although from organizations not so active in EU integration issues. However, over the last few years, the practice of prejudice and of considering civil society as a procedural element with no role in the integration process continues. An incident with civil society related to some statements of the chief negotiator did not receive a response from neither KIE nor KKIE, which chose to side with the state official, thus weakening public trust of civil society towards these structures and towards the negotiator’s office itself. Likewise, the Assembly, including KIE and KKIE, never publishes reports or data related to the contribution of civil society in their activity or to integration issues and the role of the Assembly in this process.
XIII. A more effective role of civil society. In the forum on 6/28, the Assembly invited civil society representatives to become more active in monitoring the legislative process, especially on EU integration issues. The invitation shows both the need of the Assembly for more openness and opportunities for public consultation as well as the open acceptance of the fact that the relations between the two sectors, the legislative and the civil society, are still fragile. This applies especially to the public consultation of laws and legal initiatives, as well as other acts that are under consideration. The Assembly emphasized that it has the political will to improve its relationship with civil society and highly appreciated the progress of parliamentary activity, including KIE and KKIE, in exercising their powers. Nonetheless, it admitted that there is a lack of representation of civil society in this process.
XIV. The Croatian model as a reference? Many experts have called on Albania to follow a positive reference model in relation to shaping its parliamentary engagement on EU integration, citing mainly the Croatian negotiation model. One of its innovations was the right of veto of the members of the National Integration Council in Croatia, its positive experiences in relation to cooperation with civil society and non political third actors, as well as the mechanisms of parliamentary control on integration issues. The combination of these elements strengthens the role and responsibility of the Assembly in the EU integration process.
This publication of the Institute for Political Studies (IPS) was realized in the context of the project C1 – EU – NPA, “Improving Debate on Policies and Accountability to Fulfill Basic Rights, through the creation of the Cluster 1 Albania Platform of Negotiations,” implemented by four Albanian organizations, the Center for the Study of Democracy and Governance, the Albanian Helsinki Committee, the Institute for Political Studies, and the Albanian Institute of Science, with financial support from the Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands in Tirana.
Policy Paper i plote mund te lexohet ketu:
Policy-paper-2-ISP-Role-of-the-parliament-in-Albanias-EU-integration-process
