Introduction
Following the parliamentary elections in Kosovo, the political focus was expected to shift towards the formation of new institutions, the establishment of a sustainable parliamentary majority and the creation of conditions for the election of the President of Kosovo, thereby ending the months-long institutional deadlock. Instead, the political and parliamentary crisis has deepened further, while the process of constituting the institutions remains uncertain. Alongside the lack of progress in forming new institutions, issues that directly affect interethnic relations and the security situation, particularly in northern Kosovo, have received increasing public attention. The decisions and actions of the caretaker government have raised a number of sensitive issues that have prompted strong reactions from local communities, civil society and international actors.
One of the most notable examples concerns activities related to the removal of structures in the area surrounding Gazivode Lake in the municipality of Zubin Potok. This process caused concern among the local population, prompted an intense public debate, drew reactions from international officials and resulted in the organization of a public dialogue among citizens, institutions and international representatives. The reactions that followed demonstrated that this issue extends beyond a strictly property-related and legal framework and has the potential to further affect trust between communities and institutions.
At the same time, the decision concerning the return of Serbian prosecutors triggered a new institutional and political crisis. This development comes at a time when, with the mediation of the European Union and other international partners, there had been expectations that conditions would be created for the gradual reintegration of Serbian representatives into Kosovo’s judicial system. Instead of the anticipated progress, new questions have emerged regarding the sustainability of previously reached agreements and the credibility of the normalization process.
Under such circumstances, the political agenda is increasingly moving away from resolving the institutional crisis and towards issues that have the potential to place further strain on interethnic relations and deepen existing social and political divisions. This confirms that the prolonged institutional deadlock is not merely a constitutional and political problem, but is also having an increasingly significant impact on the security situation, the rule of law and public trust in institutions.
Against this background, the analysis examines the aforementioned developments through the lens of the rule of law, legal certainty, institutional accountability and the exercise of fundamental rights, with a particular focus on the position of the Serbian community in Kosovo. Although they relate to different areas of public policy and institutional action, the cases analyzed point to common systemic challenges that extend beyond individual events and raise broader questions concerning the consistent application of the law, the functioning of institutions and the protection of the rights of non-majority communities.
The analysis is based on the conclusions of a roundtable held at the Civic Energy Centre (CEC) and organized by NGO Aktiv, as well as on an assessment of publicly available information, official statements, relevant legal acts, media reports and subsequent developments that occurred during the preparation of this analysis. The section concerning access to information also draws on the findings of Aktiv’s monitoring of the information environment during the 2026 parliamentary elections in Kosovo.
Particular attention is devoted to the transparency of institutional conduct, the availability of effective legal remedies, the timely and non-discriminatory provision of information to citizens, and the consistent application of the legal framework in force. These elements constitute essential prerequisites for legal certainty, institutional accountability and the development of public trust in public institutions, particularly in politically and security-sensitive environments.
Rule of Law, Procedural Safeguards and Institutional Accountability
The rule of law emerged as one of the central issues during the post-election period, primarily through discussions about how institutions exercise their powers, ensure procedural safeguards and respond to allegations of possible abuses. Although the cases that marked this period differed in nature, they shared one common feature: they prompted a broader debate on institutional accountability and public trust in the work of public institutions. The events during and after the celebration of Vidovdan at Gazimestan on 28 June 2026 attracted the greatest attention. Police treatment of individual participants of the event, including restrictions on the introduction of national symbols, detention of several persons and allegations of physical and psychological abuse of individual detainees, became the subject of public discussions that went beyond the framework of the event itself.
The discussion focused not only on the lawfulness of individual police actions but also on the functioning of institutional oversight mechanisms. The decision of the Kosovo Police Inspectorate (KPI) and the Ombudsperson Institution to initiate proceedings concerning allegations about the conduct of police officers during the Vidovdan celebration was regarded as an important step. At the same time, some participants expressed reservations about the effectiveness of these proceedings, referring to previous experiences in which similar procedures had not resulted in a clear institutional outcome.
Some participants criticised the international community for what they considered a lack of timely and more concrete responses to events that raised concerns regarding the application of the rule of law. The view was expressed that a more consistent and decisive response from international actors could help strengthen public confidence in institutional accountability mechanisms.
Civil society organisations from northern Kosovo issued a joint response concerning the conduct of the police, calling on the competent institutions to investigate allegations of possible human rights violations, assess the proportionality of the measures applied and determine whether procedural safeguards had been respected. During the preparation of this analysis, additional public attention was drawn to claims by Leposavić politician Vladimir Radosavljević that members of the Kosovo Police had denied him entry into Kosovo through the Jarinje crossing. This action prompted further reactions from civil society organizations and once again raised questions regarding the transparency of police conduct, the protection of procedural rights and the effectiveness of institutional oversight mechanisms.
Taken together, the cases examined in this chapter indicate that the rule of law is not limited to the lawfulness of individual decisions. It also encompasses the manner in which institutions exercise their powers, provide procedural safeguards and respond to allegations of possible irregularities. Predictable institutional conduct, effective oversight mechanisms and transparency in the work of the competent authorities are essential prerequisites for strengthening public trust in institutions and ensuring the consistent application of the principles of the rule of law.
Property Rights and Legal Certainty
The issues of the rule of law and institutional accountability examined in the previous chapter became particularly prominent in disputes concerning land management and the demolition of structures in the Gazivoda Lake area. These disputes raised questions extending beyond individual property-related cases. Public debate focused not only on ownership rights over specific structures but also on legal certainty, the predictability of institutional conduct and citizens’ ability to exercise their procedural rights effectively.
Particular attention was drawn to the removal of holiday homes and other structures in the village of Čečevo. Public discussions raised concerns about the manner in which certain procedures were conducted, particularly regarding the failure to notify owners in a timely manner, the unavailability of decisions issued by the competent institutions and the inability to exercise the right to a legal remedy. Without prejudging the lawfulness of individual decisions, the transparency of procedures and the provision of procedural safeguards dominated discussions surrounding this case
Further insight into differing legal and institutional interpretations was provided by a public discussion held in Zubin Potok and organized by the Syri i Vizionit consortium, EduTask and NGO Aktiv. Representatives of the local government, the publicly owned enterprise Ibar-Lepenac, legal experts, civil society organizations and property owners participated in the discussion, examining the legal basis for institutional action and questions of jurisdiction in the Gazivoda Lake area.
The discussion highlighted differing interpretations of the legal framework and the extent of the rights held by the owners of the structures. Some participants argued that structures should not be removed before the completion of the relevant judicial or other legally prescribed proceedings, emphasizing that access to effective judicial protection is one of the fundamental elements of legal certainty and the protection of property rights.
The protection of property rights gained further significance following the events at the Rezala camp, where civil society organizations requested clarification of the legal basis for the actions of the Kosovo Police in assisting representatives of the publicly owned enterprise Ibar-Lepenac. In a joint statement, they called on the competent institutions to make information available to the public regarding the existence of relevant judicial or enforcement decisions. They also called on international organizations to assess whether the institutions’ actions complied with the principles of the rule of law and the protection of private property. The issue of protecting property rights thus expanded to encompass the transparency of institutional conduct and institutional accountability in the implementation of administrative decisions.
During the final stage of preparing this analysis, the removal of a further eleven holiday homes in the Gazivoda area began, lending additional urgency to the issues raised during the public discussions. Subsequent developments also attracted the attention of international actors. The European Union Office in Kosovo and the embassies of the United Kingdom, Germany, France and Italy expressed concern over the continued removal of structures in the Gazivode area, calling on the competent institutions to suspend further demolitions until the outstanding legal issues had been considered and full respect for the principles of the rule of law had been ensured. In their responses, they particularly emphasized the importance of transparent procedures, the protection of property rights, access to effective legal remedies and dialogue with citizens. These responses further confirmed that the issues raised during the public discussions extend beyond the local level and constitute a matter of broader international concern.
At the same time, media reports indicate that representatives of the publicly owned enterprise Ibar-Lepenac have announced that activities to remove unlawfully constructed structures will continue. Alongside discussions about the lawfulness of these procedures, questions have also been raised about their social consequences. The Minister for Communities and Returns, Nenad Rašić, called on citizens affected by the removal of structures to submit applications for housing assistance, noting that the disputes concerning Gazivode have consequences that extend beyond the strictly legal dimension and directly affect the lives of those concerned.
Taken together, the cases in the Gazivode area indicate that property rights issues in the post-election period concerned not only the status of individual structures, but also the predictability of institutional conduct, access to legal remedies and the transparency of administrative procedures. Subsequent developments and the responses of local and international actors confirm that these elements have become central to the broader debate on the rule of law and legal certainty. Strengthening public trust in institutions depends to a considerable extent on their ability to ensure clear procedures, the consistent application of the law and the effective protection of procedural rights.
Institutional Communication and Access to Rights
Access to accurate, timely and comprehensible information is one of the fundamental prerequisites for citizens to exercise their rights and participate equally in public life. Several cases examined during the post-election period demonstrated that the challenges arose not only from the substance of particular decisions or legal provisions, but also from the manner in which information was made available to citizens, particularly members of the Serbian community. Transparent institutional communication and the consistent implementation of language rights therefore constitute important elements of legal certainty and trust in institutions.
The issue of access to information in the Serbian language was further highlighted by the monitoring of the information environment during Kosovo’s 2026 parliamentary elections. The analysis showed that, although Serbian and Albanian are official languages in Kosovo, access to information was not fully equal. Differences were identified between the Serbian and Albanian language versions of the Central Election Commission’s official website regarding the availability of documents, statistical data and information about previous electoral processes. Technical shortcomings were also identified in the Serbian-language version of the website, including non-functional links, outdated contact details and untranslated content, as well as cases in which certain documents were published late or were not made available simultaneously in both official languages.
At the same time, the monitoring also identified some positive developments. During the election campaign, a significant proportion of the content published on the Central Election Commission’s social media platforms was also available in Serbian, including visual materials, video content and instructions for voters. This practice demonstrates that improving multilingual communication is possible when there is appropriate institutional attention and planning. However, it has yet to be implemented consistently across all official communication channels.
The importance of institutional communication was also evident in other issues examined in this document. During the procedures for removing structures in the Gazivoda Lake area, public discussions focused not only on the lawfulness of individual decisions, but also on whether citizens had been notified in a timely manner, whether the relevant decisions were accessible and whether the reasoning provided by the competent institutions was sufficiently clear. These cases demonstrated that the quality of communication is an integral part of the exercise of procedural rights, since the ability to use legal remedies depends to a considerable extent on citizens receiving timely and comprehensible information.
The media play a particularly important role in this process, as they represent one of the main channels through which citizens exercise their right to information. Institutional transparency entails not only publishing information, but also making it available in both official languages, responding promptly to media enquiries and consistently providing information of public interest.
Taken together, the findings indicate that citizens’ ability to exercise their rights depends not only on the substance of laws and institutional decisions, but also on the quality of the information environment in which those rights are exercised. The consistent implementation of the Law on the Use of Languages, the simultaneous publication of information in both official languages, transparent communication and the timely provision of information are important prerequisites for strengthening legal certainty and public trust in institutions.
Conclusion
The post-election period in Kosovo was marked by numerous developments that raised issues relevant to the functioning of institutions and the position of the Serbian community. Although the cases examined covered different areas, from institutional conduct during the celebration of Vidovdan at Gazimestan and the removal of structures in the Gazivode Lake area to access to information and the exercise of language rights, they all highlighted the importance of the rule of law, legal certainty and transparent institutional conduct.
The analysis shows that public trust in institutions depends not only on the substance of individual decisions or legal provisions, but also on the manner in which those decisions are made, justified and implemented. Predictability of institutional conduct, respect for procedural safeguards, access to legal remedies and the timely provision of information to citizens are essential elements of legal certainty and contribute to strengthening institutional trust.
At the same time, the analysis indicates that challenges in exercising rights often arise not only from the normative framework, but also from its practical implementation. Insufficiently transparent procedures, inconsistent institutional communication and limited access to information in the Serbian language may further deepen the sense of legal uncertainty, particularly in situations that directly affect citizens’ everyday lives.
The responses of domestic civil society organizations, independent institutions and international actors demonstrate that the issues raised during the post-election period have been recognized as part of a broader debate on the rule of law, the protection of human and property rights and institutional accountability. This confirms that improving institutional transparency, consistently applying the law and respecting the rights of all communities are important prerequisites for building trust and strengthening democratic processes in Kosovo.
Recommendations
Based on the findings of this analysis, the following measures are recommended:
For Kosovo institutions
- Ensure the consistent application of the principles of the rule of law and procedural safeguards in all proceedings that may affect citizens’ rights.
- Improve the transparency of institutional decision-making through the timely publication of decisions, the reasoning underpinning them and information on available legal remedies.
- Consistently implement the Law on the Use of Languages by ensuring that all relevant information and documents are made available simultaneously in Serbian and Albanian.
- Strengthen coordination between central and local institutions to ensure that citizens receive clear, consistent and timely information on matters affecting their rights.
- Improve communication with the media and citizens through the regular publication of accurate and easily accessible information.
For international organizations and partners
- Continue actively monitoring the application of the principles of the rule of law, the protection of human and property rights and respect for procedural safeguards, while responding publicly, promptly and consistently in cases that raise serious concerns regarding compliance with these principles.
- Continue supporting initiatives aimed at improving institutional transparency, multilingual communication and access to information for all communities in Kosovo, while encouraging institutions to consistently fulfil their legal obligations in these areas.
