On Wednesday, April 24th, the Constitutional Court of Albania announced its decision to reject the opposition's request to annul the agreement on the administration of Butrint National Park's subzones of cultural heritage and cultural landscape. This agreement was established between the Ministry of Culture and the Butrint Foundation for Management.
 |
The Butrint Foundation for Management was formed through an agreement between the Ministry of Culture and the Albanian-American Development Foundation (AADF), a non-profit corporation registered in Delaware, United States. AADF has also supported the development of a business plan for managing Butrint. The agreement between the Ministry and this foundation envisages the management of Butrint National Park for 10 years.
Opponents deemed the agreement incompatible with the Constitution of the Republic of Albania and requested its suspension until the Constitutional Court's decision took effect.
The Court stated that it has jurisdiction to review the approving law no. 50/2022. "Regarding the agreement on the administration of Butrint National Park between the Ministry of Culture and the Butrint Foundation for Management, despite its non-normative nature, the Court accepted its jurisdiction for review. In this regard, the Court considered not only that this act has formal legal validity due to approval by the Assembly but also the constitutional nature of the claims raised by the applicant, which it considered determinative of constitutional jurisdiction," expressed the Constitutional Court, outlining its stance on the applicants' claims.
Regarding the claim of breaching the legality principle due to granting AADF the status of a strategic partner through a sub-legal act, it was deemed that the Constitutional Court lacks jurisdiction due to the individual nature of this act.
Similarly, the claim of breaching the principle of public finance control was found to be unsubstantiated, as it does not question the exercise of the State Supreme Audit Institution's competence to control public finances, regardless of the type of entity administering them.
Regarding the breach of the principle of separation of powers and local autonomy, it was evaluated that the arguments presented concern conflicts between existing laws and thus do not fall within constitutional jurisdiction.
The Constitutional Court fundamentally examined claims regarding the breach of national identity and cultural heritage, noting their alignment with the Paris Convention, which states that "the state must maintain its primary role in protecting and conserving cultural heritage" – particularly considering Butrint National Park's inclusion not only in the national cultural heritage but also in UNESCO's world heritage fund.
The Court assessed that despite administrative competence transfer to the Butrint Foundation for Management, the state continues to retain its sovereign attributes as long as it retains ownership and indirect administration over this asset.
Furthermore, it was evaluated that the agreement has established guarantee mechanisms, as the foundation is only responsible for routine administration, while other activities related to conservation and protective interventions remain the state's responsibility.
Another safeguard, according to the court, is the requirement in the agreement for the foundation to periodically report on the conservation status of cultural heritage, while the ministry establishes a monitoring board to assess the conservation status.
Based on these arguments, the Constitutional Court decided by majority vote to reject the request to annul the Butrint agreement. The Butrint agreement sparked debates in parliament and parliamentary committees.