Albanian Prime Minister Edi Rama has once again addressed the ongoing dispute over judges’ salaries, making clear that neither judicial bodies nor other institutions can replace Parliament or dictate to the legislature.

In a social media post, Rama said that salary policy is proposed by the government, approved by Parliament and implemented by the government, while the Constitutional Court should intervene only when a constitutional principle or provision is at stake.

Rama also warned that any attempt to force salary increases through coordinated political or legal action would represent a new challenge for the functioning of the Albanian state. At the same time, he stressed the importance of maintaining dialogue between independent branches of government.

“If, God forbid, the prosecutors’ and judges’ associations have decided to use coordinated political and legal means, together with prosecution and court offices, like an army lined up against the government, to impose salary increases through complaints, precautionary measures or enforcement procedures, then we are facing a new kind of challenge,” Rama wrote.

He added that such a development would not frighten the government, but would be a source of serious concern.

“But we do not want it to be this way, and I do not want to allow it to happen, because unlike what this media judge thinks, the issue of astronomical salaries is not a matter of resentment for us, but a challenge of building a European state in Albania,” Rama said.

Rama’s latest comments came after remarks by Engert Pëllumbi, a judge at Albania’s Special Court against Corruption and Organized Crime (GJKKO) and head of the Association of Judges.

In an interview with the television program Kjo Javë, Pëllumbi argued that the dispute over judges’ salaries was not primarily a matter of budget constraints, but rather one of politics and what he described as arrogance.

The disagreement comes as Albania continues to debate the appropriate level of remuneration for judges and prosecutors, as well as the balance between judicial independence, public finances and the separation of powers.