The latest OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation Memorandum characterizes the 2025 general elections in Albania as competitive but polarized, with weak parity between candidates during the election campaign.

The diaspora voting process was assessed positively, while it is emphasized that the ruling party benefited from the use of administrative resources during the campaign, creating an unfair advantage. On election day, the process was considered smooth in 95% of polling stations, although pressure on voters was recorded.

The OSCE Observer Message, which monitored the elections from 2 April to 22 May, notes that candidates generally had freedom to campaign, but some reported intimidation. The election administration managed the process overall transparently, while the introduction of votes from abroad worked well despite delays.

The report also highlights the inequality in media coverage, self-censorship by journalists and the dominant role of the two largest parties, which limit voter information. Social media contributed to further intensifying the pre-election debate, without any mechanism to identify misleading content.

Despite the smooth organization, irregularities were identified, mainly intimidation of voters, interventions by observers and party representatives, pressure on public officials, as well as weaknesses in procedures and transparency during the count.

The legal framework provides an adequate framework for democratic elections, but weaknesses and ambiguities create uncertainty in the implementation of the law. Many OSCE recommendations, such as the composition of lower election commissions, interim campaign finance reporting, and improving the electoral media environment, remain unresolved.

The new electoral system, with a combination of closed and preferential lists, was seen as favoring the two largest parties, limiting the influence of smaller parties. Some smaller parties appealed to the Constitutional Court, which did not find it unconstitutional.

Electronic voting and the use of biometric identification were implemented for the first time in some areas, with good overall management, despite some shortcomings in security testing and in the understanding of the process by voters and election officials.

For the first time, SPAK created a special team and platform for reporting electoral crimes. Out of 138 reports, 39 criminal proceedings were initiated, mainly for passive and active corruption, while some were initiated ex officio. The cooperation between SPAK, the Election Commission and the General Prosecutor's Office improved the exchange of information on electoral crimes.