The mandate of Sonila Bejtja, constitutional judges in blatant conflict of interest

The tactic of the Constitutional Court (CC) majority to protect their own mandates involves not fully justifying the decision in order to avoid affecting themselves.

The Constitutional Court published on Tuesday the decision made on October 16, 2025, by which it prematurely and unconstitutionally terminated, by a majority vote, the mandates of sitting judge Sonila Bejtja and resigned judge Elsa Toska.

The core of the majority’s decision lies in the last paragraph of point 3 of the majority’s ruling, which states: “The start of the mandate of a Constitutional Court judge during this transitional regime coincides with the date declared by the Constitutional Court as the end of the mandate of the judge whom they replace.”

In the published decision, it appears that the majority, composed of Marsida Xhaferllari, Fiona Papajorgji, Ilir Toska, Sandër Beci, and Mariana Semini, justified this paragraph only for their two colleagues, Sonila Bejtja and Elsa Toska.

According to the majority, Judges Bejtja and Toska began their mandates at the moment of completion of the mandates of the two previous judges, specifically in 2016, even though both were appointed in 2019 and 2020 for a full nine-year term, according to the official vacancy calls announced by the Parliament and the President of the Republic.

However, the Court majority, to avoid self-harm and producing the same effects on their own mandates, chose not to apply the same reasoning to themselves.

This approach by the majority is not only a clear conflict of interest and potentially an abuse of office, but it also disregards the President’s request, who had asked for an interpretation of the term lengths for all members of the Constitutional Court.

Nevertheless, the unconstitutional intent of the majority is clearly understood in the dissenting opinion, composed of Judges Holta Zaçaj, Sonila Bejtja, and Gent Ibrahimi, who stated that the scheme had lost legality as early as 2022.

The dissent’s analysis notes that, according to the majority’s logic, Judge Marsida Xhaferllari should leave office in 2027, one year before her mandate ends. Judge Fiona Papajorgji should leave in 2027, also one year early. Judge Ilir Toska, appointed until 2031, would have to leave three years early, in 2028.

Furthermore, if the same logic is applied—that the mandate of a new judge begins at the end of the predecessor’s mandate—the mandates of members Marjana Semini and Gent Ibrahimi would also be shortened by several months.

The dissenting judges argue that the majority applied a double standard, which will create future uncertainty and a constitutional deadlock, both for the Court and for the appointing bodies, regarding the timing of procedures to declare the end of mandates for sitting judges.