Albanian Constitutional Court reinstates Deputy PM, redraws the line between judiciary and government

Albania’s Constitutional Court has reinstated Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Infrastructure Belinda Balluku, ruling that her suspension by the Special Anti-Corruption Court (GJKKO) on November 20 lacked constitutional basis. The decision, made by a majority vote of the court’s full bench, annuls the preventive measure imposed upon the request of SPAK, Albania’s anti-corruption prosecution office, and allows Balluku to resume her official duties immediately.

Why is this important: While not a final ruling on the substance of the corruption case against Balluku, the decision represents a landmark institutional moment—one that redefines the limits of judicial reach into the executive branch. The case will now proceed to a full public hearing on January 22, where the Court will consider Prime Minister Edi Rama’s appeal for a constitutional interpretation of the powers of prosecutors and judges to suspend sitting cabinet members.

This is the second major institutional defeat for SPAK and GJKKO in recent months, following the Constitutional Court’s earlier ruling that reinstated Tirana Mayor Erion Veliaj. Together, the decisions mark a clear signal from the country’s highest court: elected or appointed officials cannot be removed from office without careful constitutional scrutiny.

What Rama argued: In his submission to the Court, Prime Minister Rama argued that ministers enjoy functional immunity, akin to that of members of Parliament, and therefore cannot be suspended from office unless authorized by constitutional mechanisms. The Code of Criminal Procedure prohibits preventive measures like suspension against MPs without prior parliamentary approval — a standard Rama believes must also apply to ministers.

Far from being a personal defense of Balluku, Rama has framed this legal challenge as a principled defense of constitutional order and governmental legitimacy.

“This is not about Balluku as an individual,” said one senior official familiar with the case. “It’s about ensuring that prosecutorial power does not override democratic mandates.”

SPAK under pressure: For SPAK and GJKKO, the decision represents a rare reversal in a system where their requests have historically been rubber-stamped by lower courts. While SPAK remains popular with the public for tackling high-level corruption, a growing number of critics and analysts have raised red flags about its use of extended pre-trial detentions, uneven treatment of defendants, and what many describe as heavy-handed judicial tactics.

These concerns were echoed even in the recent public hearing for SPAK’s next chief, where candidates acknowledged the need for reform and greater accountability.

A former Minister of Justice, often critical of the government but also vocal about judicial overreach, called the Balluku suspension an “attempted constitutional coup.” Others have warned of the emergence of a “republic of prosecutors.”

Had the Court upheld the suspension, critics argue, it would have set a dangerous precedent, effectively allowing prosecutors to suspend any member of the government — even the Prime Minister — at their discretion, simply by initiating a criminal case.

Broader significance: Despite focusing on Balluku’s case, the Constitutional Court’s decision is not about her guilt or innocence. Instead, it defines the rules of engagement between Albania’s judiciary and executive branches and draws a red line around the authority of courts to interfere with democratically appointed officials.

“This ruling standardizes the balance of powers in Albania,” noted one constitutional expert. “It says clearly that justice must be done, but not by destabilizing the institutional order.”

Prime Minister Rama is now politically free to keep Balluku in office until a final ruling is made on the charges against her. Whether she remains or resigns is now a political question, not a legal one.

Next steps: The case will return to the Constitutional Court on January 22, when the judges will issue a final decision on whether the suspension violated constitutional boundaries and whether the judiciary overstepped its role.

Until then, the ruling is widely seen as a historic moment in Albania’s justice reform trajectory, one that may finally begin to draw clear and enforceable limits on prosecutorial power, even in the name of fighting corruption.