The rule of law is a fundamental constitutional value of the Republic of Kosovo and at the same time a universal principle of modern constitutional democracies. In the classical doctrine, Dicey defines the rule of law as the dominance of the legal norm over arbitrariness and extra-institutional pressure. This concept has been further developed by contemporary theorists, who emphasize that the rule of law means resolving conflicts through predetermined legal procedures and competent institutions, and not through popular pressure or street mobilization.

In this sense, public calls for protests as a means of imposing will on state institutions constitute a deviation from the principle of the rule of law, especially when they are articulated by persons who are themselves part of the legal system.

The Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo stipulates that sovereignty emanates from the people and is exercised through constitutional institutions. This provision is fully consistent with European constitutional doctrine, according to which representative democracy does not allow the replacement of institutions by forms of informal pressure.

The European Court of Human Rights has consistently emphasized that, although protest is a form of free expression, it cannot serve as an instrument to circumvent legal procedures or undermine institutional authority. This is particularly important when calls for protests come from legal professionals who have full knowledge of the legal mechanisms available.

Disciplinary liability of Lawyers in relation to the rule of Law

In a constitutional and democratic state, the legal profession is entrusted with a role that extends beyond the representation of individual interests. Lawyers constitute an integral component of the justice system and bear heightened legal and ethical responsibilities in safeguarding constitutional order, the rule of law, and public confidence in judicial institutions¹.

Within this framework, the public conduct of Mr. Arianit Koci, a licensed lawyer, particularly his public calls for citizen mobilization and street pressure against state institutions, raises serious issues of professional and disciplinary liability. These issues warrant a comprehensive constitutional, statutory, and doctrinal analysis.

Legal Status of the Lawyer and the Applicable Standard of Responsibility

Mr. Arianit Koci holds the status of a licensed attorney, thereby being directly subject to:
– the Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo,
– Law No. 04/L-193 on the Bar,
– the Code of Professional Ethics of the Kosovo Bar, and
– relevant international standards governing the legal profession².

Comparative legal doctrine consistently characterizes lawyers as “officers of justice”, meaning institutional actors whose primary function is to stabilize—rather than destabilize—the constitutional order³. This status imposes a positive obligation to operate strictly within institutional and procedural frameworks.

Description of Conduct Relevant for Disciplinary Assessment
The public conduct of the subject under consideration is characterized by:
– public calls for protests and citizen mobilization;
– portrayal of street pressure as an alternative to legal procedures;
– relativization of the authority of constitutional institutions;
– instrumentalization of citizens in difficult socio-economic circumstances.
Such conduct cannot be classified as purely private freedom of expression, but rather constitutes public professional conduct of a lawyer, and must therefore be assessed under disciplinary standards.

Violation of Constitutional Principles
The Rule of Law
Article 7 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo enshrines the rule of law as a fundamental constitutional value⁴. This principle requires that: • disputes be resolved institutionally;
– legal procedures be respected;
– extra-institutional pressure not substitute legal norms.
Public calls for street pressure articulated by a lawyer therefore constitute a direct violation of the rule of law principle.

Exercise of Sovereignty
Pursuant to Article 2 of the Constitution, sovereignty derives from the people and is exercised through constitutional institutions⁵. This formulation categorically excludes the replacement of institutional decision-making with informal or extra-procedural pressure.
Violations of Law No. 04/L-193 on the Bar
Violation of Article 5 – Principles of Legal Practice
Article 5 obliges lawyers to exercise their profession:
– in accordance with the law;
– with honesty;
– in service of the rule of law⁶.
The promotion of street pressure as a means of action is directly incompatible with this provision.

Violation of Article 6 – Professional Duties
Article 6 requires lawyers to:
– preserve the dignity of the profession;
– refrain from conduct that undermines public confidence in justice⁷.
Public discourse portraying legal mechanisms as ineffective and substituting them with street action constitutes a clear discrediting of the legal profession.
Activation of Article 52 – Disciplinary Responsibility
Article 52 establishes disciplinary liability where a lawyer:
– violates the law;
– violates the Code of Ethics;
– damages the authority and reputation of the profession⁸.
The conduct analyzed cumulatively satisfies all three criteria.

Violations of the Code of Professional Ethics
The Code of Professional Ethics obliges lawyers to act with:
– professional integrity;
– restraint and proportionality;
– respect for public trust in the justice system⁹.
The instrumentalization of citizens and encouragement of extra-institutional actions constitute serious ethical breaches, as they:
– compromise professional neutrality;
– generate artificial public pressure;
– undermine the authority of the justice system.

VII. International Standards and Comparative Doctrine
The UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers require lawyers to promote and protect the rule of law¹⁰. The CCBE Code of Conduct for European Lawyers prohibits conduct that undermines public confidence or exerts unlawful pressure on institutions¹¹.
Classical and contemporary legal doctrine (Dicey, Bingham, Alexy) is unanimous in recognizing that legal professionals play an institutional stabilizing role and that street pressure does not constitute a legitimate legal instrument¹².
Instrumentalization of Citizens and the Principle of Proportionality
According to constitutional theory, all public action must satisfy the principle of proportionality, namely that it be:
– necessary;
– suitable;
– proportionate stricto sensu¹³.
Mobilizing economically vulnerable citizens for objectives that can be pursued through institutional legal mechanisms fails all three tests and therefore constitutes professionally unacceptable conduct.

Conclusion
In light of the Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo, the Law on the Bar, the Code of Professional Ethics, and applicable international standards, it is evident that the public conduct of Mr. Arianit Koci constitutes:
– violations of constitutional principles;
– violations of statutory provisions governing the legal profession;
– serious ethical breaches;
– a fully substantiated basis for disciplinary liability.
Such conduct undermines the rule of law, damages the dignity of the legal profession, and erodes public confidence in the justice system.

Footnotes
1. Hazard, G. & Dondi, A., Legal Ethics: A Comparative Study.
2. Law No. 04/L-193 on the Bar; Code of Professional Ethics of the Kosovo Bar.
3. Bingham, T., The Rule of Law.
4. Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo, Article 7.
5. Ibid., Article 2.
6. Law No. 04/L-193 on the Bar, Article 5.
7. Ibid., Article 6.
8. Ibid., Article 52.
9. Code of Professional Ethics of the Kosovo Bar.
10. United Nations, Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers.
11. CCBE, Code of Conduct for European Lawyers.
12. Dicey, A.V.; Bingham, T.; Alexy, R.
13. Alexy, R., A Theory of Constitutional Rights.

The Land of Leka;31.01.2026