'They were dominated by the party-state', is electoral reform the solution after the ODIHR report?!

The publication of the OSCE/ODIHR final report today on the May 11 parliamentary elections has brought the need for a deep and comprehensive electoral reform back to the center of the political debate.

In a voluminous document of several pages, the international observation mission highlights a series of problems that, according to them, have violated the standards for free and fair elections in Albania.

According to the report, the elections were held peacefully, but in a climate of deep political polarization and with unequal conditions for the contestants.

" The ruling party's candidates had an unfair advantage due to the use of state resources during the campaign ," the report states, among other things. 

International observers also point out that "pressure on public administration and voters, lack of transparency in campaign financing, and the influence of political interests in the media have negatively affected the integrity of the process ."

The opposition has warned that it will seek a deep electoral reform, supported by the international factor, to guarantee the real separation of the state from the party and to restore citizens' trust in the electoral process.

But is electoral reform the solution?

The ODIHR report clearly recommends the necessity for improvements in the legal and institutional framework, emphasizing that " late legal changes, adopted without broad consultations, undermine the stability and credibility of the process."

This has raised concerns that without genuine reform, future elections could face the same problems.

However, the experience of recent years has shown that electoral reforms in Albania are often the product of momentary political agreements, which do not fundamentally address the structural problems of the system.

In this context, political actors and civil society representatives have brought the issue of electoral reform back to attention, considering it a necessary step to improve democratic standards and not to be used as an alibi to mitigate international pressure, without bringing about real changes.

Meanwhile, discussions on its content, format and guarantee of implementation remain open.