Constitutional Law is Ultimately About People’s Lived Experiences – 5in10 with Dukagjin Abdyli
Dukagjin Abdyli is a distinguished legal expert specializing in European Law, Constitutional Law, and International Law. He holds a Doctor of Legal Sciences (Dr. iur.) degree from Karl Franzens University of Graz, where his research focused on the interaction between European and international legal frameworks. He also obtained an LLM in EU International Relations and European Economic Law from Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, which further enhanced his expertise in EU legal systems. Dukagjin has held key positions in Kosovo’s public institutions, with a particular focus on constitutional and European integration processes. During his tenure at the Ministry of European Integration, he played a crucial role in the legal approximation process, ensuring the harmonization of Kosovo’s legislation with the EU acquis. Currently, he serves as Deputy Chief Legal Advisor at the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Kosovo, where he provides legal analysis and contributes to the protection and enforcement of fundamental rights.

1. How would you explain your research to someone who is not an expert in the same field?
My research examines how constitutional courts apply what we broadly call the “rule of law” in practice. While this concept is often invoked in political and legal discourse, its concrete meaning is shaped by institutions such as the Court of Justice of the European Union, the European Court of Human Rights, and the Venice Commission. These bodies develop standards on judicial independence, fair trial guarantees, and fundamental rights.
The central question of my work is how constitutional courts—particularly in Kosovo and Albania—use European legal standards to protect democracy, judicial independence, and fundamental rights. In essence, I am interested in whether courts merely cite European standards, or whether they genuinely integrate them into their reasoning and institutional practice. This matters because constitutional courts are often the final arbiters of democracy and rights protection in their respective systems.
What makes this particularly important today is the broader European discussion on democratic resilience and rule-of-law backsliding. In the Western Balkans, constitutional courts are expected not only to resolve legal disputes, but alsoto contribute to democratic consolidation and European integration. I therefore approach constitutional adjudication not merely as a technical legal exercise, but as part of a wider European constitutional dialogue.
2. What were academic or personal inspirations that led to your current research?
My academic interests developed at the intersection of European law, constitutional law, and international human rights law. During my doctoral and postgraduate studies, I became increasingly interested in how supranational legal systems influence domestic constitutional orders, particularly in states undergoing democratic transition.
At the same time, my professional experience at the Constitutional Court of Kosovo strongly shaped the direction of my research. Working on constitutional cases involving judicial independence, separation of powers, and fundamental rights allowed me to observe how abstract European standards are interpreted and operationalized in practice. I became particularly interested in the tension between constitutional theory and institutional realities: courts are expected to safeguard the rule of law, yet they themselves often function in politically contested environments.
I was also influenced by the broader European debate on democratic backsliding and the evolving jurisprudence of the CJEU and the European Court of Human Rights on judicial independence. Cases such as Associação Sindical dos Juízes Portugueses, Baka v. Hungary, Commission v. Poland and Ástráðsson v. Iceland demonstrated how constitutional adjudication increasingly transcends national boundaries and contributes to a common European constitutional space.
3. Which stations of your professional journey were particularly formative to you?
Several stages of my professional journey have been especially formative. My work in the process of approximation of legislation with the EU acquis gave me an early understanding of how European integration transforms domestic legal systems beyond formal harmonization. It showed me that European law is not simply imported; it is interpreted, adapted, and sometimes resisted within national institutional frameworks.
Another defining experience has been my work at the Constitutional Court of Kosovo. Engaging directly with constitutional adjudication has profoundly shaped the way I think about the relationship between law, institutions, and democratic governance. It also strengthened my interest in comparative constitutional reasoning and judicial dialogue across Europe.
Teaching has been equally important. As a lecturer in European law, international law, and human rights, I constantly revisit fundamental constitutional questions through discussion with students. Teaching creates a productive exchange between academic reflection and practical experience. It also reminds me that constitutional law is ultimately about people’s lived experiences and the credibility of public institutions.
Finally, International academic mobility and programs like reconstitution have likewise been formative because they exposed me to different legal cultures and methodological approaches. These experiences reinforced the importance of comparative perspectives in constitutional scholarship.
4. Do you think that academic mobility changes the way in which research projects are conceptualized, developed, or carried out? What are your personal experiences in this regard?
Absolutely. Academic mobility is transformative because it challenges assumptions that often remain invisible within one’s own legal culture. My experience collaborating internationally made me more attentive to the relationship between legal doctrine and institutional context. For researchers from smaller or transitional legal systems, mobility is particularly vital. It allows local experiences to become part of a wider European dialogue. I see this as a mutually enriching exchange: comparative engagement helps us contextualize local challenges, while the experiences of transitional democracies contribute meaningfully to the broader debate on democratic resilience across the continent.
5. What book, article, film, exhibition, or song would you recommend, and why?
I would highly recommend Catherine Ashton’s “And Then What? Inside Stories of 21st-Century Diplomacy”. As the first EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs, Ashton provides a rare, behind-the-scenes look at the high-stakes negotiations that shaped the modern European landscape—including the dialogue between Kosovo and Serbia.
What makes this book particularly relevant to my research is her focus on the “and then what”—the realization that signing a treaty or establishing a legal standard is only the beginning. It mirrors my own interest in how European legal principles are not just formally adopted but must be “translated” into domestic practice. Her accounts of diplomacy in the Western Balkans illustrate that the rule of law is not merely a technical framework; it is a living process that requires constant institutional care and political courage.
Citation: Dukagjin Abdyli, Constitutional Law is Ultimately About People’s Lived Experiences – 5in10 with Dukagjin Abdyli, in: TRAFO – Blog for Transregional Research, 28.05.2026, https://trafo.hypotheses.org/65714
OpenEdition suggests that you cite this post as follows:
Forum Transregionale Studien (May 28, 2026). Constitutional Law is Ultimately About People’s Lived Experiences – 5in10 with Dukagjin Abdyli. TRAFO – Blog for Transregional Research. Retrieved June 14, 2026 from https://doi.org/10.58079/16adc


