Volume 14, Issue 2

The article analyses the impact that the diminutive size of the four continental Europe micro states has upon their constitutional arrangements and their approach toward continental integration mechanisms. Generally speaking, the international commitment toward integration mechanisms is one of the distinguishing traits of micro states. It may seem a paradox, but actually the international dimension is much more strategic for micro than for macro states. However, being micro territorial enclaves demanded certain ability from the part of European micro states when managing foreign relations in order not to be swallowed by their macro neighbours. Therefore, they carried out for centuries a cautious policy of ‘guarded openness’, trying to strike a balance between the maintenance of their traditional institutions and the need to interact on a continental scale. Constitutional systems that at a first glance are unusual may be an obstacle to integration and thus have to be reformed. However, not too much, because otherwise the whole system may implode if deprived of its original constitutional balance. The protection of national tradition and identity is conservative, in the sense that it arises from the necessity of self-preservation, rather than from ideology. The article claims that the ambivalent approach of continental Europe micro states have when interacting with macro states within the Council of Europe and the EU directly derives from their diminutive size. Furthermore, the relevant role played by the diminutive size is proved by the fact that recently the EU adopted a specific micro states approach. Hence, the article also aims at investigating how they try to strike a balance between the commitment toward self-preservation – ie their constitutional identity – and the commitment toward continental integration mechanisms.

Many modern constitutional systems, despite the prevalence of adult suffrage, forbid certain classes of person from participation in the most important aspects of the democratic process, whether by withholding the vote from them or by denying them the right to hold office. While the former has received a considerable amount of attention in the literature, the latter has been comparatively neglected. The aim of the article is to redress this imbalance. It starts by offering, quite generally, a taxonomy of such bans. It then appraises, with particular reference to the constitutions of the English-speaking world, some of the most common grounds for disqualifying persons from holding elective office and the various purposes that these might be thought to serve. A major theme is the question whether some grounds of disqualification, notwithstanding their long history, can be justified.

Instruments of direct democracy can be – and are – used to further and strengthen illiberal democracy by restricting minority rights (1). The legal design of these instruments can make this easier or less likely (2).

Since becoming a potential candidate country for the EU accession in 2000 and in particular after being granted candidate status in June 2014, Albania has taken many positive steps to meet the necessary standards for its EU integration, through among other things, strengthening democracy and the rule of law and the harmonization of its national legislation with the acquis communautaire . In 2016, as part of the pre-conditions for the opening of the accession negotiations for the country, the Albanian Parliament passed a major justice reform which brought about many constitutional and legislative changes, as well as changes to the organization and functioning of justice institutions in Albania. A key component of the reform was the transitional re-evaluation of judges and prosecutors (also known as the vetting process). While the reform itself was supported and praised by the EU and international institutions, the vetting process has affected the functioning of the Albanian judiciary at all levels. The paralysis of the justice system due to the low number of judges who successfully passed the vetting process, as well as the resignation of many others, has significantly increased the backlog and the number of pending cases before the courts. Thus, the aim of the paper is to analyze the influence of the justice reform on individual’s right to a fair trial within a reasonable time in Albania and state’s obligations to guarantee this right as provided by the Constitution of Albania and the European Convention on Human Rights.