Kosovo Constitution

What were Kosovars thinking when they signed the Constitution?

Some scholars would argue differently in this matter, while some suggest that it was belied, others believe that it was a conundrum with the successful history of Kosovo's independence.

In this paper, I will try to further elaborate the goal of the entrenchment of today Kosovo's Constitution under the resurgence of the so wanted independence of Kosovars, and their willing to settle down for less, I would say, with the purpose of fanatically protecting its property from Serbia.

The desire to protect its land its deeply rooted in Kosovars feeling; therefore, it is my belief that Article 1, section 3 of Kosovo's Constitution The Republic of Kosovo shall have no territorial claims against, and shall seek no union with, any State or part of any State. , coupled with Article 2, section 2 . The sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of Kosovo is intact, inalienable, indivisible and protected by all means provided in this Constitution and the law. , are the most autochthonous articles of this Constitution, not only but also the main objective of its intent.

Having said that, there's one key thing to remember, Kosovo had a constitution prior to today's one, an autochthonous one, which in today's Republic of Kosovo, in light of a constitution that is a mirror reflecting the national soul – the identification of the ideals and aspirations of a nation, would, indeed, have constitutionalism.

The idea of a constitution in the Republic of Kosovo has its roots deep in the bloody efforts of Kosovar humble people to create the state.; Thus, the best way to strengthen the roots of the Republic, in order to materialize and give proper weight to the will of the people of Kosovo, on September 7, 1990, Kosovar scholars wrote down Kaçanik Constitution. The Kacanik constitution testified that the constitution of the Kosovar people was much more than a guide to the establishment and strengthening of the state. At the same time, it was also an inspirational symbol for the initiation of supplication for freedom. 'It has a great political and historical importance, because according to it was organized the institutional life of Kosovars in the 90s'.

Thus, although we can distinguish Kaçanik and today's constitution with one another we can also tell the resemblances. The main resemblance would be regarding the reasons to why these constitutions were signed. They both required the independence of Kosovo. 'Parliament Speaker Veseli praised the historic importance of September 7, 1990, and the courageous step of the protagonists of the time, who in exceptional circumstances they undertook the right action in response to Serbia's constitutional aggression. Mayor Veseli considered this act as an important moment of the historical course of our national movement for the liberation of Kosovo, acts and courageous efforts for Kosovo not to fall to the bottom of history, forgetfulness of the world and undying submission, so " This political act marked direct response to the constitutional aggression that Serbia did against Kosovo in 1989. Said Mayor Veseli

Yet, Kaçanik Constitution did not survive for a long time, nonetheless it was groundbreaking for its day, so it is to be considered the engenders it would provide, if parts of it were to be followed.

That said, one could answer what were Kosovars thinking when they signed the constitution of 2008.

The instill of the idea of the sovereign, multi-ethnicity Republic, or, the watershed of the history of Kosovo, that would consist of the independence, and the independent property of Kosovars.

Two significant matters that Kosovars were historically seeking from Serbia, has finally been presented on a paper, the Constitution. Was it signed because the framers believed it was the best presentation of Kosovars, or was it signed because it was nothing but a Hobson's choice, it's something to be discussed. If one thing remains for sure, it's the absolute will of independence for its all territory. One can interpret Kosovo's constitution in various ways, the multi-ethnicity purpose, the check and balance purpose, or the purpose of the reforms in institutions. Without undermining their notable importance, I firmly believe these purposes were de facto, known as a common sense to be granted, de jure in the constitution. Hence, although an esoteric approach, I credit the constitution's purpose to be the independence, with no intention of uniting with any other State, even though not to the face of law, but specifically never joining Serbia again.

However, regarding Kosovo's Constitution goal to mark its territory, the articles in the Constitution itself, seem to be biased. Even though the Constitution of Kosovo proclaims the territorial indivisibility of Kosovo, there are some territorial areas within Kosovo that are not effectively governed by Kosovo's institutions. The Northern Mitrovica region of Kosovo is one such case; it remains (as of this writing) outside of the Constitution of Kosovo's authority. This has led to the conclusion that, although the Constitution of Kosovo provides a basis for indivisible territorial sovereignty, its relevance in practice remains unrealistic in some places. So far, this has been one of the most egregious violations of the Constitution of Kosovo. The lack of constitutional supremacy in those sections has been associated with not only criminal resistance but also total institutional failure and negligence. Therefore, constitutional proclamations of territorial unity face enormous challenges in practice.

On the other hand, if that was not enough, there's the land swap discussion taking place now between Kosovo and Serbia. The idea itself is quite simple. 'The Presevo Valley in southern Serbia, where the population is predominantly ethnic Albanian, would join Kosovo. In return, the BBC writes, Serbia will restore full control over the Kosovo Serb majority area north of the Ibar River, which runs through the heart of Mitrovica.

'The Kosovan president, Hashim Thaçi, and his Serbian counterpart, Aleksandar Vu?i?, have suggested an exchange of territory that could be part of a deal that would pave the way for a final settlement between Belgrade and Pristina. Kosovo broke from Serbia in 1999, and declared its independence in 2008, which Belgrade has never recognized. Vu?i? and Thaçi have met regularly under the auspices of the European Union's foreign policy chief, Federica Mogherini, to hammer out a deal that could put Kosovo on the path to a seat at the United Nation and improve European Union accession prospects for both countries.

However, as prior mentioned Article 1 (3) of the Constitution of Kosovo states that Kosovo shall seek no union with any State or a part of any State . At the same time, article 18 (1) of the Constitution of Kosovo demands for a two-thirds majority of all deputies of the Kosovo assembly for the ratification of any international agreement dealing with territory. Hence, the ratification of any bilateral treaty regarding the change of borders would face the requirement of a two-third majority of all deputies in the parliament. Highlighting this particular article of the constitution, it is to be questioned if the ratification would ever succeed.

But, if so, what about constitutionalism? When the idea of 'constitutionalism' refers to a specific way of thinking and theorizing about the constitution.

Kosovars while eyes on the prize, that at time was the independence from Serbia, disparity their will settled down for less, now that eyes on the prize are a seat in United Nations and another one in European Union, would mark Kosovo incessant to their desire, while not being able to revitalize constitutionalism.

I highly believe that Article 1 (3) of Kosovo's Constitution The Republic of Kosovo shall have no territorial claims against, and shall seek no union with, any State or part of any State. embraces the ultimate purpose of hidden intention for a never reunion with Serbia, even if that meant the never reunion with Albania as well, that at that time was the will of the myriad of Kosovars. In that order, Kosovars were deterred if they would ever have to unite with Serbia again, so they agreed to a deal for their constitution. Considering the history of Kosovo, and their identification as Albanians, this article was of a significant importance, the ultimate scope of the constitution. Nevertheless, it is of a significant importance at this day where negotiations are being held for exchanges of territory.

This article reflects Kosovars in their constitution. That is why I credit it as the main intent of Kosovo's constitution, and not only. This intent can engender constitutionalism, which I consider to be substantial in a democracy. Furthermore, do I hold that constitutionalism is rooted in one Country's culture. Kosovars have always fanatically protected their property; they've already cultivated a culture in regard to it. Reasons why I stand that eyes on the prize might be cultivating an erroneous culture for Kosovars, leading to virulent effects of an establishment of constitutionalism.

Furthermore, I will conclude that regarding the circumstances of Kosovo's constitution, the principle of the indivisible territory proclaimed in its articles, it is the ultimate purpose of the constitution itself. It presents the autonomy of Kosovars. Despite, the historical background it carries within itself the purpose of constitutionalism, the idea of constitutional supremacy for the northern part of Kosovo, and today the legitimacy of it, as it holds dichotomy within itself.

With this in mind, what's more persuasive of establishing legitimacy than a constitution which reflects its people will.

Compelling, the desire to protect its land that its deeply rooted in Kosovars feeling , in view of a constitution that is a mirror reflecting the national soul , the independence to a never reunion with Serbia, follows the central aim of Kosovo's constitution.

Cite this page