PUBLIC STATEMENT- ON THE PRIORITY ISSUES AND NEED OF THE ELECTORAL PROCESS, TWO MONTHS AHEAD OF THE PARLIAMENTARY ELECTION DATE

Based on the Electoral Code, today is the last day for political subjects, parties or coalitions, participating in the parliamentary elections of May 11, 2025, to submit the multi-name lists. Two months later, citizens will be voting. With the submission of the lists, the electoral campaign de facto begins for candidates and electoral subjects.

Attaching significance to this moment, our organizations, the Albanian Helsinki Committee (AHC), Civic Resistance (CR), and the Institute of Political Studies (IPS), which have engaged in quality, impartial, and independent monitoring of the electoral process, as well as in the investigation and punishment of electoral crime, deemed it necessary to make this public statement regarding five issues that are essential and of public interest.

1. Diaspora vote. With the end of the legal deadline for registration for the first time in our history as a state, over 200,000 citizens who live abroad will be exercising their right to vote.
   • Civil society welcomes their participation and invites those registered to actively and freely exercise their right to vote.
   • At the same time, we address political parties, candidates, the CEC, and law enforcement bodies to demonstrate responsibility and real political and institutional will, to avoid the application of two standards in elections, one inside the country and another for the diaspora.
   • The integrity of the electoral process of the diaspora requires complete security for the secrecy of the vote, financial transparency, institutional monitoring, and guarantees for the prevention of every form of abuse of public assets and electoral crime.

2. Integritety of candidates. Legislation has established preventive criteria for candidates with negative records and creates the possibility for subjects to verify candidates with the Prosecution Office or the Authority on Files (AIFSS) regarding data on decriminalization and the past.

2. We find with regret that parties did not take advantage of this protective and transparency mechanism, avoiding without reason the process for early verification, according to law 138/2015 on decriminalization, article 7, paragraph 5, and law 45/2015 on the right to information on documents of the former state security service, article 30.
3. Inclusion in the closed lists of some candidates who are in an investigation process or under security measures by our judicial system is a disturbing development, contrary to public expectations for clean politics and candidates with integrity. The lack of a system of meritocracy and competition within the parties also weakened the integrity of candidates and the political parties themselves.
4. At this phase, we appeal that parties respect the solemn engagement expressed by their chairpersons in the registration declaration, article 64/e of the Electoral Code, especially that they will refuse to participate in practices of vote-buying, intimidation or threats, as well as of obtaining unlawful financing or benefits, especially those coming from criminal activity.

3. Election Integrity. Elections are done with and for citizens. Therefore, it is important that political parties and candidates present their electoral programs and focus on discussions on the best solutions and alternatives for the country and citizens.
   • In the name of civil society, we express our disagreement to personalized and denigrating discourse, harsh language, and tense environment. After 10 parliamentary electoral processes, Albania has the possibility and the need to have a more proactive need of political parties and their leaders. Their behavior has a direct impact on public trust in the process, election participation, and democracy itself in Albania.

4. Electoral process administration. Civil society has supported measures undertaken by the CEC regarding preparations for the elections and is active in consulting draft acts submitted by the CEC and in denouncing cases of abuse of the Electoral Code, especially regarding state resources.
5. Expecting that the elections will mark a higher standard of administration compared to the past, our organizations express concerns about the inability to exercise the right to vote for social categories that lack the possibility, those with disabilities, etc., for the different interpretation of legal provisions by CEC composing structures, for not fully covering the monitoring of financial expenses of candidates and subjects.
6. Our organizations appreciate the positive cooperation with the CEC in consulting draft acts of this institution, but at the same time, recommend that the CEC inform the organizations on the degree in which their opinions and suggestions are reflected in these draft acts.
7. The observers of our organizations have been made aware of disturbing cases of misuse of state resources, which include financial support for pensioners, changers in the structure of the state budget, increased provision of social programs/grants in some municipalities of the country, etc. We appeal to central and local public institutions to not make available to political parties and the electoral campaign employees or taxes that should be used for services and investments for citizens. The same call goes to public employees so that they do not jeopardize themselves, their freedom, post, and career and refuse illegitimate requests of political parties to engage in abuse of office.
8. In parallel with the need to investigate and react within a reasonable time to denunciations by civil society organizations and the CEC, we also re-emphasize the importance of the State Election Commissioner undertaking investigations on his initiative, a finding that has been repeated from past elections.
9. Furthermore, we emphasize the need for proper institutional administration of the electoral process, including the publication on time of the preliminary voter lists and their notification within the deadline stipulated by the Electoral Code, as well as the need to increase CEC oversight during these two months for internal movements of the population between municipalities, to prevent any potential abuse in this regard, for electoral purposes.

5. Prevention and punishment of electoral crime is being monitored by our organizations thanks to positive cooperation with the General Prosecution Office and the Special Prosecution Office against Corruption and Organized Crime.  

5. We express concern about the fact that there are still investigation processes that continue and are not concluded on electoral crimes that occurred in the past two local government elections of two years ago.
6. Until January 2025, it results that about 54% of cases in the ordinary jurisdiction prosecution offices and 44% at SPAK have been concluded (with decisions to not initiate or to drop criminal proceedings).
7. Until January 2025, only in 4% of the cases investigated for electoral crimes in the previous local elections, the court issued guilty verdicts for defendants.
8. The high indicators mentioned above, concretely “over-extended deadlines for investigation/adjudication,” “almost half the cases of electoral crimes not initiated or dropped,” and “very few cases for which the court issued guilty verdicts” are not positive in terms of effective investigation and punishment of electoral crime in our country.
9. Supporting the reent engagement of SPAK, the General Prosecution Office, and the CEC, we encourage them and other law enforcement bodies (state police, prosecution offices of ordinary jurisdiction) to carry out objective verifications and/or investigations, that are comprehensive and conducted within a reasonable time, on any suspected case of electoral crime, before and during the electoral campaign.
10. Based on data from previous years on the lack of denunciations by citizens, which are a result of fear of confronting repercussions and distrust, we applaud SPAK’s initiative to create the portal for denunciations that we hope will be available to the public and extensively promoted and accessible by the public as soon as possible.
11. We appreciate as a positive development the increase of the engagement of the prosecution office, with the establishment of the Task Force by SPAK, for monitoring in the field, that will help increase the number of cases initiated upon their own initiative or ex – officio.
12. At the same time, we encourage all citizens that they have an irreplaceable role in a democratic society, inside and outside the country, to denounce every encountered violation of the electoral process with the CEC, the prosecution office, and also address our organizations if they need free legal aid.

6. Lastly, our organizations will be active during the coming days and weeks, monitoring the process in its most important aspects. Our findings will be public.
   • We will have continued statements, positions, findings, and recommendations before the campaign, during the campaign, and after it, in keeping with the standards required by electoral legislation.
   • We invite the media to be as active as possible in our partnership in the interest of citizens and appeal to political parties and candidates to respect the principles and standards of their monitoring, as an essential element in an electoral process and functional democracy.