Mandatory Defence in Albanian Criminal Procedure: Between Formal Guarantee and Effective Defence
Abstract
This paper examines the institution of mandatory defence of the accused in criminal proceedings as one of the fundamental guarantees of the right to a fair trial. Starting from the specific procedural position of the accused and the objective inability to exercise the right of defence effectively without professional legal assistance, the study analyses the substantive role of defence counsel as a key element in ensuring equality of arms and adversarial proceedings before an impartial court.
The analysis draws on the Albanian constitutional, conventional, and criminal procedural framework, with particular focus on Article 49 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Within this framework, the 2017 amendments are of particular importance, as they not only expanded the scope of mandatory defence but also influenced the manner in which these cases are approached and applied in practice. The paper examines in detail each case provided by law, highlighting the underlying guarantee-oriented rationale, particularly in relation to the most vulnerable subjects of criminal proceedings, the seriousness of the criminal offence, and the critical stages of the process.
A substantial part of the study examines the effectiveness of defence in cases involving court-appointed counsel, in light of the standards developed in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights and Albanian judicial practice. In this regard, the analysis underscores the distinction between the mere formal presence of defence counsel and the genuine exercise of effective defence. Particular attention is also drawn to the absence of clear qualitative criteria governing both the selection and the ongoing oversight of court-appointed lawyers. At the same time, it is emphasised that abuse of the right of defence by the accused or by defence counsel cannot constitute grounds for alleging a violation of the right to a fair trial, provided that the court has genuinely ensured the possibility of effective defence.
Downloads
PlumX Statistics
References
2. Criminal Code of the Republic of Albania.
3. Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Albania.
4. European Convention on Human Rights.
5. Law No. 55/2018 on the Legal Profession in the Republic of Albania.
6. Statute of the Albanian Bar Association.
7. United Nations. (1985). United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (Beijing Rules).
8. United Nations. (1989). Convention on the Rights of the Child.
9. United Nations. (1990a). United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty (Havana Rules).
10. United Nations. (1990b). United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for Non-custodial Measures (Tokyo Rules).
11. Council of Europe. (2004). Recommendation Rec(2004)10 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on the protection of the human rights and dignity of persons with mental disorder.
12. Constitutional Court of the Republic of Albania. (2003, February 17). Decision No. 5.
13. Constitutional Court of the Republic of Albania. (2003, November 24). Decision No. 33.
14. Constitutional Court of the Republic of Albania. (2007, December 18). Decision No. 42.
15. Constitutional Court of the Republic of Albania. (2008, September 18). Decision No. 19.
16. Constitutional Court of the Republic of Albania. (2009, July 23). Decision No. 23.
17. Constitutional Court of the Republic of Albania. (2011, June 10). Decision No. 25.
18. Constitutional Court of the Republic of Albania. (2011, September 19). Decision No. 37.
19. Constitutional Court of the Republic of Albania. (2012, February 10). Decision No. 4.
20. Constitutional Court of the Republic of Albania. (2012, February 28). Decision No. 8.
21. Constitutional Court of the Republic of Albania. (2012, December 18). Decision No. 55.
22. Court of Appeal for Serious Crimes of the Republic of Albania. (2014, December 1). Decision No. 122.
23. Special Court of First Instance for Corruption and Organised Crime of the Republic of Albania. (2022, January 26). Decision No. 26.
24. Special Court of Appeal for Corruption and Organised Crime of the Republic of Albania. (2021, December 3). Decision No. 31.
25. Special Court of Appeal for Corruption and Organised Crime of the Republic of Albania. (2022, June 14). Decision No. 32.
26. Supreme Court of the Republic of Albania. (2014, March 10). Unifying Decision No. 1 (Joint Panels).
27. Supreme Court of the Republic of Albania, Criminal Chamber. (2024, June 11). Decision No. 00-2024-1069 (140).
28. Supreme Court of the Republic of Albania, Criminal Chamber. (2024, June 11). Decision No. 00-2024-1073 (143).
29. Supreme Court of the Republic of Albania, Criminal Chamber. (2024, May 2). Decision No. 00-2024-807 (114).
30. Supreme Court of the Republic of Albania, Criminal Chamber. (2025, April 3). Unifying Decision No. 00-2025-1733 (87).
31. Supreme Court of the Republic of Albania, Criminal Chamber. (2025, July 29). Decision No. 00-2025-1284 (202).
32. A. and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 3455/05, 19 February 2009.
33. Altınok v. Turkey, no. 31610/08, 29 February 2012.
34. Çatal v. Turkey, no. 26808/08, 17 July 2012.
35. Correia de Matos v. Portugal [GC], no. 56402/12, 4 April 2018.
36. Czekalla v. Portugal, no. 38830/97, 10 January 2003.
37. D.D. v. Lithuania, no. 13469/06, 9 July 2012.
38. Güveç v. Turkey, no. 70337/01, 20 April 2009.
39. Hokkeling v. the Netherlands, no. 30749/12, 3 July 2017.
40. Imbrioscia v. Switzerland, no. 13972/88, 24 November 1993.
41. Iavarazzo v. Italy, no. 50489/99, 4 December 2001.
42. Kallweit v. Germany, no. 17792/07, 13 April 2011.
43. Kamasinski v. Austria, no. 9783/82, 19 December 1989.
44. Kampanis v. Greece, no. 17977/91, 13 July 1995.
45. Nikolova v. Bulgaria [GC], no. 31195/96, 25 March 1999.
46. Öcalan v. Turkey, no. 46221/99, 12 May 2005.
47. Reinprecht v. Austria, no. 67175/01, 12 April 2006.
48. Sejdovic v. Italy, no. 56581/00, 1 March 2006.
49. Somogyi v. Italy, no. 67972/01, 10 November 2004.
50. Stanev v. Bulgaria [GC], no. 36760/06, 17 January 2012.
51. Varbanov v. Bulgaria, no. 31365/96, 5 October 2000.
52. Winterwerp v. the Netherlands, no. 6301/73, 24 October 1979.
53. Lara, D. (2019). Commentary on Criminal Procedure. Morava Publishing House.
54. Res Publica. (2016). Effectiveness of legal aid in criminal proceedings in Albania: How far are we from international standards?
Copyright (c) 2026 Lulzim Karini, Eldorado Aga

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.


