Pristina, May 27th, 2024 – On May 23, 2024, the Ombudsperson was called upon by the Assembly of the Republic of Kosovo to present before the deputies the Annual Report on the state of human rights and freedoms for the calendar year 2022.

Unlike previous practices, where Annual Reports have received the approving vote of deputies (or their majority), this time the majority of present deputies voted against Considering it as a very sensitive moment, requiring not only attention but also clarification of the situation, the Ombudsperson finds it necessary to address the public opinion as follows: The annual report of the Ombudsperson submitted to the Parliament by March 31 is a constitutional and legal obligation. This obligation was also fulfilled for the 2022 Report, the reference to which in the plenary session is made according to the legislative agenda and not upon the request of the Ombudsperson.

Furthermore, over the years, the Ombudsperson has called for the respective annual reports to be considered immediately after submission and to be debated in parliamentary sessions during the spring sessions, which has not been taken into account. On the other hand, the Ombudsperson has continuously tried to draw the attention of deputies to the fact that the purpose of presenting the Annual Report to the Parliament is achieved when the issues raised there and the state of human rights and freedoms in the country, and their respect by the authorities, become the subject of discussion and treatment by the Parliament, which has the power and duty to push forward the recommendations of the Ombudsperson, seeking accountability and responsibility from public authorities whenever necessary.

The PRO or AGAINST vote does not change or alter the reality and the situation regarding human rights and freedoms in the country. Even the Pro voting of Annual Reports, without parliamentary debate and without subsequent legislative actions that affect the respect of citizens’ rights in the country, is meaningless. The way the Ombudsperson’s Annual Report was treated in the session on May 23, 2024, raises concerns about the understanding that the legislature has for the Institution of the Ombudsperson, the mandate it exercises, its independence regarding the evaluation of the issues it raises in its daily work, and how it decides to treat the issues it processes, whether complaints or cases according to its official duty.

The Ombudsperson takes the opportunity to remind that the basis for the establishment and functioning of National Human Rights Institutions, such as the Ombudsperson Institution in Kosovo, is defined by international standards, particularly the Paris Principles, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly, as well as the Venice Principles adopted by the Council of Europe.

These standards stipulate the necessity for national human rights institutions to act independently, free from any undue influence or pressure, in order to fulfill their mandate effectively in protecting the rights of individuals, emphasizing the requirement for states to refrain from actions that obstruct effective functioning. Also, Recommendation No. 2 of the General Policy of the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI)3 for equality bodies also makes it clear that these institutions “… should operate without any interference from the state, political parties, or other actors” and that “Equality bodies may publish annual reports, which should be discussed by parliament or its relevant committees and by the government, but should not be subject to their approval.’’

The situation created in the parliamentary session of May 23, 2024, signals disregard for these standards, as it undermines the system of institutional control and balances and the role of the Parliament itself. The Ombudsperson expresses concern that the absence of many deputies in the chamber when the Ombudsperson’s Annual Report was supposed to be discussed, the lack of debate regarding the findings of the Report, and then the call to vote against and the closure of the session according to this call, will narrow the space in reporting on the progress of the country on human rights issues. Such parliamentary actions are considered interventions and pressure on the work of National Human Rights Institutions and clearly indicate moments when authorities should be called upon for reflection and mature institutional actions.