The Constitutional Court of Albania has issued a second significant ruling in support of Tirana Mayor Erion Veliaj. The court determined that the Albanian Supreme Court did not meet essential constitutional standards in reviewing the mayor's ongoing pretrial detention. It annulled the prior Supreme Court decision and sent the case back for fresh consideration. This follows an earlier landmark ruling that upheld Mayor Veliaj's voter-granted constitutional authority as the elected leader of Tirana.

In the new decision the Constitutional Court found that the Supreme Court had not performed the thorough review demanded by Albania's Constitution. This includes assessing whether continued detention was still necessary and proportionate, examining less restrictive options, addressing the constitutional impact of blocking the elected mayor from fulfilling his duties, and weighing key constitutional arguments tied to his treatment in court proceedings.

While the majority sent the matter back for further review, one judge issued a separate concurring opinion that went further. That judge determined the evidence presented by lower courts did not meet the constitutional threshold of reasonable suspicion needed to justify detention. The opinion noted that prosecutors had cited facts reflecting only routine official duties, which would not convince an objective observer of any wrongdoing. The concurring judge therefore found that continued detention lacked the required constitutional basis under Albanian law and the European Convention on Human Rights.

Other judges on the Constitutional Court also raised concerns about Mayor Veliaj's treatment. Separate opinions criticized the use of a glass enclosure in court as contrary to human dignity, found that detention restrictions hindered effective communication with counsel, stressed the Supreme Court's failure to uphold the presumption of innocence and the right to a proper defense, and faulted lower courts for not properly considering the constitutional effects of preventing an elected mayor from serving his constituents.

Collectively the majority opinion and concurring views highlight multiple independent constitutional shortcomings. These include insufficient evidence of reasonable suspicion, inadequate evaluation of necessity and proportionality, weak protection of the presumption of innocence and defense rights, improper courtroom procedures affecting dignity and lawyer communications, and insufficient attention to the consequences of removing an elected official from office.

The ruling sets important constitutional standards beyond this single case. It reaffirms that limits on personal liberty require meaningful judicial oversight, that courts must independently verify ongoing necessity and proportionality, that alternatives must be seriously considered, and that constitutional protections apply fully even in high-profile matters involving public officials.

Daniel J. Fetterman, lead international counsel for Mayor Veliaj and a partner at Kasowitz LLP, released this statement: "The Constitutional Court merits praise for its careful and principled application of Albania's Constitution. This marks the court's second decision identifying major constitutional issues in the state's handling of Mayor Veliaj. The court has fulfilled its constitutional role by ensuring that guarantees remain enforceable even in cases involving public officials and criminal allegations. Rights exist to guarantee that challenging matters follow the law rather than convenience. This outcome upholds a core principle of constitutional democracies in Europe and the United States that personal liberty cannot be limited without rigorous scrutiny and adherence to safeguards. The court has now mandated that level of review, and one member concluded the evidence never met the standard required to justify detention initially. We expect that once the Supreme Court conducts the required review and applies the proper standards it will find continued detention unconstitutional and order immediate release."

Fetterman added that when these deficiencies are viewed alongside the reported use of two purported complainants whose existence has not been verified and the involvement of a prosecutor who admitted lacking required qualifications, the judiciary must ultimately decide whether the combined defects have undermined the proceedings to the point that prosecution cannot proceed in line with due process, the Albanian Constitution, and the European Convention on Human Rights. He concluded that the rule of law is judged by the readiness of independent courts to enforce rights in difficult circumstances and expressed hope that Albania's institutions will uphold these principles.