As a geopolitical and rule-of-law analyst tracking the mechanics of democratic backsliding across Turkey and the Western Balkans, I closely follow the work of the European Commission for Democracy through Law, better known as the Venice Commission. Bringing together independent constitutional scholars and senior legal experts, the Commission acts as Europe’s definitive authority on the health of democratic institutions. Through its advisory opinions and legal frameworks, it establishes the precise boundaries between legitimate judicial administration and the weaponization of state power against political rivals.
A key example of this work is the Venice Commission’s landmark Rule of Law Checklist, which establishes parameters for assessing a country’s rule of law abidance. The Checklist, which helps identify democratic backsliding, earned the endorsement of multiple EU bodies. The Venice Commission also works closely with the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) to issue joint opinions aimed at safeguarding democratic standards across member states. The Venice Commission and ODIHR often publish joint opinions on the constitutional and legal frameworks governing democratic institutions, such as their May 2026 opinion on campaign finance.
Given my interest in state-backed persecution, I took a particular interest in the Venice Commission’s 2025 report: Impact of the Pre-Trial Detention of Mayors on the Exercise of Local Democratic Governance. The report underscores a state practice that infringes upon both the due process rights of detainees and the political rights of the electorates they represent, a tactic that national governments can use to quash local opposition. Such practices not only affect individual officeholders but also risk distorting democratic representation and weakening local governance.
The Venice Commission’s report was not theoretical but stemmed from an extant practice in countries suffering from democratic backsliding. In Turkey, for example, following the 2019 local elections, authorities systematically targeted Kurdish political representation by removing elected mayors from the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP). By early 2021, the authorities had imposed trustees on 48 of the 65 municipalities won by the HDP in 2019. In 2025, Turkish authorities detained Istanbul mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu alongside more than 100 municipal officials on charges ranging from corruption to alleged terrorism links, placing him in pre-trial detention shortly after his emergence as a leading opposition figure.
Turkey is not a singular case. The B40 Balkan Cities Network, representing dozens of metropolitan municipalities, also addressed the arrest of Mayor İmamoğlu alongside the comparable case of Erion Veliaj, the mayor of Albania’s capital, Tirana. In a joint letter, 76 B40 mayors described the arrests as a “dangerous trend” threatening local democracy.
After examining Mayor Veliaj’s case, I too saw not only a threat to local governance but also a broader indicator of systemic due process deficiencies in Albania. Beyond his individual case, I learned that Albanian authorities rely extensively on pre-trial detention, with rates estimated to be four to five times higher than the EU average. The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) also addressed this practice in Gëllçi v. Albania, where the Court found that the applicant’s pre-trial detention violated the European Convention on Human Rights’ Article 5, which protects the fundamental rights of liberty and security.
Turning to the case of Mayor Veliaj, who has been held for 18 months, I see the democratic backsliding and human rights violations – which the Venice Commission, B40 Balkan Cities Network, and ECHR – have addressed. The Albanian authorities have failed to demonstrate why less restrictive alternatives – such as a property guarantee – would be insufficient for mayor Veliaj, particularly given that his co-defendants were released under minimal conditions. In my review of his case, I have not found individualized evidence substantiating continued detention on grounds such as flight risk, witness tampering, or obstruction of justice – measures that typically warrant pre-trial detention.
Though without referring to the advisory opinion by name, I am pleased to see that the Albanian Constitutional Court has recently taken the essence of the Venice Report into consideration. In a decision from June of this year, the judges acknowledged that the mayor’s detention conflicts with his democratic mandate and called on the Supreme Court for a renewed review, expected to take place on 15 September, more than two and a half months after the Constitutional Court ruling. While this is encouraging, I would like to see the Albanian judiciary take a more forceful stance by ordering the mayor’s unconditional release pursuant to EU judicial standards, under which pre-trial detention should be a “a last resort and regularly reviewed.”
At the EU level, the issue of pre-trial detention, specifically of local politicians, requires a multifaceted approach. Mayors İmamoğlu and Veliaj are members of the Republican People’s Party and the Socialist Party, respectively. Both these parties are affiliated with the EU’s Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats, which should therefore have both the political incentive and institutional responsibility to take a leading role in confronting the misuse of pre-trial detention as a tool of state repression.
At the same time, this issue need not be partisan. As it has done with previous Venice Commission reports, the EU should endorse the report on the pre-trial detention of mayors and call for Albania to abide.
Albania’s rule-of-law challenges are especially pertinent given its bid for EU membership. The Copenhagen criteria explicitly incorporate rule-of-law requirements within two central negotiating chapters, making compliance a foundational condition of accession. Currently, Albania’s pretrial detention practice conflicts with EU and basic human rights standards.
Given Albania’s enlargement aspirations, the EU must respond decisively to these serious human rights violations. If the EU is to remain credible in its enlargement policy, it must confront these violations directly and insist that Albania bring its pre-trial detention practices into full alignment with European human rights standards.
