The Assembly approved in the early hours of Wednesday morning a wide-ranging package of amendments to the Criminal Code. The government presented them as "harmonization with European standards". But in practice, the changes produced a selective strengthening of the punitive state, through a rapid and politically closed process.
The package was voted on at around 03:00 in the morning, with only the votes of the socialist majority. It included around 50 changes and additions to Criminal Code, among them also partial decriminalization of defamation, through the amendment of Article 120.
The Criminal Code, initially adopted in 1995, has already undergone 26 amendments in 31 years. Ten of them came after decisions of the Constitutional Court. The frequency of changes indicates a lack of stability and long-term vision.
The latest changes were proposed in October 2025. They followed the draft of a New Criminal Code, presented in July by the Ministry of Justice. The draft of the new Code faced strong criticism from lawyers, academics, the media and civil society and as a result the government withdrew it without submitting it to the Parliament.
So, instead of a complete reform, the majority chose the path of patchwork. Partial, scattered changes and without a broad public debate. The question remains: Does this approach meet the expectations of European integration? According to the government, yes, but the path followed is not convincing.
Even though it is in its fourth term, the socialist majority is still avoiding the political costs of a new Penal Code. Such a reform requires debate, consensus and a balance between public safety and fundamental rights. Elements that were missing in the last process concluded on Wednesday morning.
What do the changes include?
The package extended criminal jurisdiction to foreign citizens resident in Albania, even for crimes partially committed outside the territory. They were excluded from the principle of "double criminality" several serious crimes, including human trafficking and sexual abuse of minors.
There were revisions and specific articles to combat terrorism. Meanwhile, additional penalties were added in cases of refusal of extradition and a ban on the practice of professions involving contact with children for persons convicted of criminal offenses. Penalties for pornography, exploitation and sexual crimes against minors were strengthened, with sentences of up to 20 years in prison.
A significant change was the removal (point 7 of Article 28) of the possibility of reduction or exemption from punishment for members of criminal groups, even when their cooperation may be crucial for solving the criminal activity. This step raises questions about the effectiveness of complex investigations and the fight against organized crime itself.
In the same package, a special article (Article 143/a/8) was also included for “Fraud affecting the financial interests of the European Union”Misuse of EU funds is now punishable by up to 5 years in prison, or up to 10 years when the amount misused exceeds 50 euros.
But without the clarification and punishment of concrete cases, especially those related to IPARD funds, this article risks remaining declarative. A formal signal to the EU, more than a real means of accountability.
The article in question will remain as a shameful stain of abuses.
Defamation, journalists and double parking
The package partially decriminalized (Article 120) defamation, but only for a vague category. "registered and well-known journalists". Insult will continue to remain a criminal offense. Thus, the government seems to be aiming to create a dual protection regime by opening the way for selective interpretations.
setting "known" and with "register" for journalists leaves room for a parallel development in terms of a possible requirement for licensing or some kind of "Journalist's order" apo "media workers".
This is seen as a way to limit freedom of expression, as free journalists, or engaged citizens, or whistleblowers who speak out on certain issues, will continue to face criminal forms of prosecution. "slander".
In parallel, violence against journalists will now be treated as "hit because of duty" (Article 237), with sentences ranging from one to five years in prison. Certainly, a positive measure, but accompanied by a problematic mechanism of defining a journalist leaves room for interpretation.
Thus, in practice, the state avoids the complete decriminalization of defamation and once again retains the instruments of legal pressure.
But the problem with the package was not only what it did not decriminalize, but also what it chose to criminalize.
Among the changes were provisions that extend the reach of the Criminal Code to everyday behavior, which until yesterday were treated administratively, that is, with fines.
(Article 293/1) “Stopping the vehicle on the second lane of the road” will now be dealt with more severe criminal measures.
In a country where there is a significant lack of parking infrastructure, the criminal regulation of this phenomenon appeared as a replacement of educational policy and long-term urban plans with a punitive policy.
This is the crux of the problem: The government is using the Criminal Code to compensate for its failures in public administration.
Instead of structural solutions, it chooses to protect citizens through fear of punishment. "with a fine or one year in prison."
The amendment that did not pass
At the end of the session, the proposal made the day before by Socialist MP Erion Braçe to toughen (Article 288) penalties for the sale of tobacco and electronic cigarettes to minors was discussed.
amendment It provided for fines of up to 500,000 lek and imprisonment of up to 16 years in cases where the trade resulted in death.
The proposal was not supported by the socialist majority, which abstained. In a package that does not hesitate to criminalize second-row parking, the criminal protection of the health of minors was left out.
This contrast exposes the selective nature of reform, or the lack of broad discussions about intervention.
The Criminal Code is not strengthened where the public interest is indisputable, but where the state requires control and swift action.
In this context, the recent changes do not constitute a penal reform. They are a series of punitive measures, gathered under the banner of “European harmonization,” but guided by the logic of political risk management.
The Criminal Code is gradually becoming an instrument to cover up public policy failures. The less the state functions, the more the punitive approach expands with additional articles.
In this sense, the early morning vote on Wednesday is not the end of this debate. The new Penal Code will come up for discussion again, but the patches are a signal that Albania is entering a phase where the criminal law is used as a substitute for governance and not as the last resort for the application of justice.
Read also:
- Government proposal: “Registered journalists and partial decriminalization of defamation”
- 18 organizations demand the complete decriminalization of defamation and insult
- Decriminalization of defamation, as the end of the media-government dialogue
Erblin Vukaj has completed his studies in “Communication Sciences” and further mastered (MSc) in “European and International Journalism” at the University of Tirana. Since 2012, Vukaj has been working as a professional journalist, gaining experience in online media, print media, radio and television. He has covered various issues such as current affairs, health, environment and sports. In parallel, he has led and been involved in several research projects on the communist past in Albania.
