Institutional Coup by the ‘Magistrates’ Republic’?

By Fatos Çoçoli
An institutional coup is a devastating blow to the independence relations of a state’s key institutions, as defined by its Constitution. Parliament has the independence to set the State Budget each year, while the government, with its Ministry of Finance, has the independence to implement precisely the budget approved by Parliament.

On September 11, 2026, 271 judges from 20 courts across the country gathered and demanded the implementation of substantial salary increases, on the basis of Constitutional Court Decision No. 15, dated February 17, 2026, which sets a different method for calculating magistrates’ salaries, completely disregarding the spirit of the Constitution regarding proportionality in the salary levels of the state administration.

But the demand of these judges was not limited to the claim for improved financial compensation. It escalated into a warning-threat that, if this demand were not met, the judges would take measures, up to reducing court proceedings, as if the holding of trials were the prerogative of a private judicial enterprise and not a constitutional duty, for which magistrates receive a salary increased threefold since 2016!

Meanwhile, on September 9, 20 authorized court officials, together with the heads of the Judges’ Union, the National Judges’ Association, and the Prosecutors’ Association, filed a criminal complaint with SPAK against the Minister of Finance, for failing to implement the demand for the immediate increase of the salaries of Albania’s 880 magistrates (judges and prosecutors) on August 1, 2026.

On the basis of Constitutional Court Decision No. 15, dated February 17, 2026, the magistrates are demanding 40 million euros a year in additional salaries, as well as retroactive salary arrears from May 25, 2023 through August 31, 2026. These increases burden the State Budget by 125 million euros.

Are we facing an ordinary institutional conflict, or is a model being created in which magistrates, through their governing bodies and associations, exert direct pressure on the government and Parliament for a disproportionate increase of their own salaries?

I judge that, with the behavior so far of the justice system’s governing bodies and their associations, we are in the conditions of a grave institutional violation, if not nearly an institutional coup. This is because the obligation to implement a Constitutional Court decision does not necessarily mean that every state institution (and courts are also state institutions) can order its own salary level, or create a new budgetary obligation, without the proper legal procedure.

The executive — that is, the government and the Ministry of Finance — cannot secure additional funds from the State Budget without Parliament approving the law for additional funds in the Budget. And they are not few, but 165 million euros! Impatient, the judges are warning of a reduction in court proceedings.

Parliament should decide on the temporary suspension of the implementation of Constitutional Court Decision No. 15, dated February 17, 2026, until it receives the opinion of the Venice Commission on whether this Constitutional Court decision is in line with the spirit of the Constitution of Albania regarding the preservation of proportionality in salary levels in Albania’s state administration. The MPs of the Parliament must decide on this four days later, on September 17, 2026.

The Ministry of Finance is responsible for the administration of public finances and for preparing budget proposals, within its legal competencies. The Minister of Finance, in the case of the significantly increased salaries of magistrates under the Constitutional Court decision — is he refusing a clear constitutional obligation, or is he asking that the obligation be implemented through the law and the Parliament’s procedure? I believe it is the latter.

Warning of a reduction in court proceedings: the red line!

If judges warn that they will reduce court proceedings because their salary demands have not been met, then we have a major issue that directly affects the citizen.

Because the judicial process is not the property of the judge. It is a public service and a constitutional duty. A citizen awaiting a decision on property, a family dispute, a criminal case, an economic harm, a violated right, or a labor dispute cannot remain hostage to a financial conflict between institutions.

With this warning-threat, the justice institutions have crossed the Rubicon with complete irresponsibility. A collective form of temporary work restriction is not allowed by the constitutional and legal status of magistrates.

But even if there is a legal mechanism for expressing professional concerns, it cannot be turned into a tool that undermines citizens’ right to a trial within a reasonable time.

There can be no financial justice for the magistrate by undermining justice for the citizen! All the more so since the magistrate’s salary has so far increased 2.5 times in 8 years!

In today’s debate, the concern is not only whether judges are demanding even higher salaries. The concern is whether the justice bodies are seeking to gain a new competence: determining the state’s financial obligations!

The independence of magistrates cannot be a privilege without limits

The independence of judges and prosecutors is one of the foundations of democracy. But independence does not mean that magistrates can demand any salary level without limits. Independence requires appropriate salaries, but not higher than those of the President of the Republic! Independence! Independence requires protection from political pressure, but not the creation of a privileged caste of magistrates with salaries twice as high as today’s leaders of the state administration.

If citizens see that judges are demanding even higher salaries while court proceedings are reduced, without any increase in their quality, then trust in the justice system is badly damaged.