The Constitutional Court of Kosovo has published the full judgment regarding the election of the Deputy Speaker of the Assembly from the Serb community, emphasizing that the Deputy Speaker must be proposed by the majority of deputies belonging to that community.
The full ruling was released several days after the Court issued an initial notice concerning the election of Nenad Rašić as Deputy Speaker during the previous legislature, finding that his election was carried out in violation of the Constitution and the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly.
“The candidate for Deputy Speaker of the Assembly from among the deputies of the Serb community is proposed by the majority of deputies of the Serb community; whereas the candidate for Deputy Speaker from among deputies of other non-majority communities is proposed by the majority of deputies of those non-majority communities, in compliance with formal requirements and in good faith,” the judgment states.
Rašić, leader of the party For Freedom, Justice and Survival, was elected Deputy Speaker from the Serb community in October 2025 through a draw initiated by the Speaker of the Assembly, Dimal Basha.
The draw was organized after the Serbian List — which held nine seats at the time and will hold the same number in the new legislature — failed to secure the necessary votes, prompting the activation of the lottery mechanism.
His election was contested by the Serbian List, the main Serb political party in Kosovo, which is backed by Belgrade.
Since then, the Assembly has been dissolved and new elections have been held. The Constitutional Court clarified that its judgment does not have retroactive effect.
This means the ruling does not apply to decisions taken prior to its entry into force, but only to future cases.
What Does the Judgment Say?
The Court ruled that the right to propose the Deputy Speaker from the Serb community belongs to the majority of deputies from that minority.
The judgment states that the activation of the lottery-based deadlock-breaking mechanism “should occur only under exceptional circumstances, specifically when the majority of deputies from non-majority communities fail to propose candidates.”
The country’s highest judicial authority noted that, in the specific case, nine candidates from the Serb community were proposed and voted on three times following their nomination by the community’s representative.
“Consequently, the Court finds that the majority of deputies from the Serb community exercised their right to propose the Deputy Speaker of the Assembly, namely a member of the Assembly Presidency. Furthermore, following the request of the elected Speaker of the Assembly to propose the remaining unelected deputy from the Serb community, the representative of the Serb majority requested the re-proposal of candidates from that majority, based on the right established in paragraph 4 of Article 67 of the Constitution in conjunction with subparagraph 1 of paragraph 6 of Article 12 of the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly,” the judgment states.
While it is within the Assembly’s competence to assess the circumstances that necessitate the activation of deadlock-breaking mechanisms, the Court “strongly emphasizes that such mechanisms cannot be used as a regular procedure for electing the Speaker or Deputy Speakers, but only under specific circumstances when necessary to unblock the process of constituting the Assembly, and only to the extent that they serve the constitutional purpose for which they are established.”
“In principle, as previously emphasized, proposals by parliamentary groups or deputies who hold the right of nomination, in the spirit of good faith and cooperation, should aim to reach consensus, secure the necessary votes, and result in the election of candidates as proposed and as prescribed by the Constitution. Moreover, based on the aforementioned constitutional provisions, this principle is of particular importance in guaranteeing the right of representation of non-majority communities, which do not possess sufficient numbers to independently secure the election of their representatives to the Assembly Presidency,” the ruling adds.
The Constitutional Court further stated that the lottery mechanism cannot be used in circumstances where the majority of Assembly deputies determine the representative of a non-majority community without a proposal from that community, arguing that such an approach would “in essence constitute a circumvention of constitutional guarantees and those established by the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly.”
Following the Court’s announcement of the judgment on December 28, Speaker of the Assembly Dimal Basha criticized the decision, arguing that it contained “fundamental errors in the interpretation and application of the relevant norms.”
He claimed that the Constitutional Court’s findings regarding the election of the Serb Deputy Speaker were “unfounded.”
Basha stated that Rašić was not proposed by the majority of Serb deputies because, according to him, no proposal was submitted by that majority.
“In other words, the Constitutional Court itself acknowledges that the majority of deputies from the Serb community did not propose Mr. Rašić; therefore, we are dealing with a refusal, or in other words, a failure to propose on their part,” Basha wrote on social media.
On October 16, 2025, the Serbian List submitted a complaint to the Constitutional Court regarding the election of the Deputy Speaker from the Serb community, alleging violations of the Constitution, the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly, and a previous Constitutional Court ruling.
The Court had previously addressed a complaint by the Serbian List concerning the issue of deputy speakers after Speaker Dimal Basha declared the Assembly constituted without the election of the fifth Deputy Speaker from the Serb community.
Subsequently, the Court ruled that the Assembly had not been properly constituted and required deputies to elect the Deputy Speaker from the Serb community in order to pave the way for the formation of the Government.
In that decision, the Constitutional Court stated that the proposal for a Deputy Speaker from non-majority communities — in this case, the Serb minority — must be made by the majority, or the largest number, of deputies from the Serb community.
