The GJKKO has addressed the High Judicial Council with a request to initiate legal amendments that prevent the blocking of judicial processes by lawyers' boycotts. The court emphasizes that collective non-appearance violates the rights of the individual and the principle of protection from the unification of the public justice service. According to the institution, the protest remains an individual right that should not suspend legal and professional obligations towards clients or the court.
In addition to regulating the processes, the request also includes a proposal for the representation of magistrates in the governing bodies of the Chamber of Advocates on the basis of reciprocity. The GJKKO highlights that the decision-making of this chamber directly affects the administration of justice, especially in matters related to personal freedom. The proposal is accompanied by an analytical report that relies on domestic and international jurisprudence to guarantee the continuity of the sessions.
Announcement:
The Special Court of First Instance for Corruption and Organized Crime has addressed the High Judicial Council, requesting that the Ministry of Justice and the Parliament of Albania be informed of the need for legal intervention in two directions:
1. Establishing clear legal rules to prevent the interruption of judicial processes due to the collective failure of lawyers to appear, guaranteeing the fulfillment of defense obligations, the continuity of trials and respect for individual rights.
2. Provision for the representation of magistrates in the governing bodies of the Chamber of Advocates, based on the principle of parity and institutional reciprocity, in order to strengthen coordination in the administration of justice. This request is based on the fact that, while the legal profession is represented in the governing bodies of the justice system, judges and prosecutors are not represented in the governing bodies of the Chamber of Advocates, although the decision-making of these bodies can directly influence the conduct of trials and the guarantee of mandatory protection.
In its request, the Court emphasizes that the right to protest is a fundamental freedom, the exercise of which must respect the law, the principle of proportionality and the rights of others. A call for collective protest, addressed to lawyers, does not constitute a strike within the meaning of labor legislation and does not suspend professional obligations towards the client and the court. Participation in the protest remains a free and individual choice. The freedom to protest also includes the freedom not to protest.
In this context, the GJKKO assesses that the collective non-appearance of lawyers in court sessions, when it conflicts with the professional obligations of the defense and prevents the guarantee of individual rights, constitutes a form of protest that, in the concrete circumstances, does not comply with the requirements of legality and proportionality, especially in procedures that affect personal freedom. This assessment is related to the means used and its consequences, without prejudice to the right of lawyers to express their opposition in other lawful forms.
According to the constitutional jurisprudence referred to in the accompanying report, the Chamber of Advocates is a professional organization governed by public law, while the profession of lawyer contributes to the realization of a public purpose and to the provision of a service necessary for the administration of justice. For this reason, the exercise of collective rights must be harmonized with the responsibilities arising from this role and with the effective guarantee of the right to defense.
The importance of the continuity of justice is also reflected in the legal ban on strikes for magistrates and the restrictions imposed on the administration of the justice system. Although these bans do not directly apply to lawyers, they demonstrate the importance that the legislator has attached to the uninterrupted functioning of justice as an essential public service.
The Court has taken and will continue to take the measures provided for by the legislation in force to guarantee effective protection and the conduct of trials within a reasonable time. In addition to these measures, the proposed intervention aims to create clearer legal guarantees to prevent the recurrence of situations that may hinder the functioning of justice and violate the procedural rights of the individual.
The request is accompanied by an extensive analytical report, which examines Albanian legislation, domestic and international jurisprudence, as well as comparative practices, in support of the institutional assessment of the situation and the proposed interventions.
