Gavrosh LEVONJA Despite the positive influence that the press has on the life of a country, people also have complaints about the work of the press and express differing views about imposing restrictions, so that the press is not allowed to channel itself into harmful currents that may have consequences for society. Although the idea of censoring the press is unacceptable, readers believe that certain measures should be taken to restrict press freedom for some categories of news. The reasons vary widely, from safeguarding military or state secrets to eliminating sex and violence from the press. These negative aspects of the press are encouraged, to some extent, by people’s tendency to be drawn to the coverage of negative phenomena, the treatment and repeated discussion of the same subject, intrusions into the private lives of particular individuals—especially prominent personalities and well-known figures—and the coverage of various scandals. These afflictions, which have affected the press in countries with a long press tradition, a high level of culture, and an ethic in reporting events and discussing different issues—there is no doubt—have also found shelter in our press. Indeed, untrue or entirely fabricated things get published, and through this “mixture” (lies and truth), the message transmitted to the reader is tendentious. Someone is murdered; some newspapers give the murder a political coloring, as if it had been instigated by those in power or by some political organization, and do not hesitate to write that “the murderers were raising toasts with government leaders in a luxurious city establishment,” or, in another more or less similar case, that “police officials were present and remained passive.” In this respect, such negative practices are caused by the passive stance of the competent authorities. In such a case, either action should be taken against the murderer denounced by the newspaper in question, or the person who supplied the press with false information should be held accountable; normally, the person accused by the newspaper should state what action they will take against it. Not infrequently, we also come across newspapers presenting “the exceptional” as something general, or manipulating readers through polls or unclear statistical data in a sophisticated way—for example, by making comparisons with other countries or manipulating the “per capita” factor. Such phenomena are commonplace even in coverage of the Italian aid operations during 1991. In recent days, readers have observed the evaluations in the official press, which describe various testimonies given in court as “blows” against Nano, while the left-wing press calls them “facts that prove his innocence.” In this case, instead of being informed about the truth that interests them, readers are left wondering “who is right and who is manipulating.” The press, unquestionably, serves whoever pays for and finances it; in this way, the phenomena mentioned above also become a means of serving the financier. If we accept that the official mass media are funded by the state, and private newspapers draw on party funds to serve those parties, who finances the “independent” newspapers? Suspicions about how this category of press is financed grow when one reads articles with anti-national content in the pages of some of them. ...various scandals. These ills, which have afflicted the press in countries with a long tradition—whose newspapers have a high standard of culture and ethics in reporting events and discussing various issues—have, beyond any doubt, also taken hold in our young press. Freed from the shackles of 50 years of dictatorship, it is now in full expansion, venting all the anger accumulated over this time, and resembles more a raging river which, now and then, when it fails to find its proper course, causes more harm than good. Thus, in the battle taking place in our press among different groups, different political forces or individuals, discussion often degenerates into taking up peripheral issues, into the private life of an individual, where, naturally, there can be no shortage of slander, denigration, exaggeration, and so on. Meanwhile, important events or issues are ignored in silence, or written about in microscopic print, while peripheral matters are given entire pages or huge headlines. Thus, while issues concerning Albanian emigration to Greece are not addressed—such as their legal status and treatment by the Greek authorities—articles are written about Albanian prostitutes in Greece, and even include information that can never be considered accurate. And while articles are written about Albanians in Greece, nothing is written about Albanians beaten by the Greek police and military at the border or in Greek towns and villages. Often, through a ...

It is unclear why the indictment does not mention this denunciation Asked whether it was the Bufi Government that first denounced Fatos Nano, Professor Pashko replied: “Yes, yes, it is true. We were the first to denounce him...” Thus, it was the Government of Stability that first denounced Fatos Nano. This is best confirmed by the fact that, as soon as the Bufi Government took office, it immediately changed the procedure for distributing aid. Aid was no longer distributed in cash, but in quantities of goods. Most importantly, the Bufi Government demanded the immediate removal of Lev. e Co as distributors of this aid. It is clear that such changes could hardly be considered an initiative of this government and its concepts. The Stability Government’s immediate change to Fatos Nano’s practices shows not only that these actions were dangerous. It also shows that, if the Nano practice had continued, the Bufi Government too would not have escaped becoming compromised and involved in corruption. But Professor Pashko, first and foremost, could neither tolerate nor accept such a thing. Why, then, was this problem not made a major issue? Why did it pass by almost unnoticed? Only those who did not live in Albania at that time could ask such questions: the great political tension, the maximum concentration on removing the communists from power, the mixed government (communists + democrats)—all this together meant that the major irregularities in the distribution of aid, the speculation and misappropriation, passed without attention, unnoticed. Had there been even a single moment of calm, the aid issue would have come to the forefront, and Fatos Nano would certainly have gone to trial. And if that had happened, would Nano then have played the “political persecuted” card? Perhaps. But that is his business. To defend themselves, people find the means and methods they consider most appropriate. Only in this case, he would have had to explain what reason President Alia and the Bufi Government could have had for politically persecuting Nano?(?) politically persecuting Nano?(?!) In any event, we must accept that on March 22, Fatos Nano was subjected to a political trial. The people themselves conducted it: by not giving his party their vote, they condemned him, among other things, for the misguided economic policy he pursued during his brief time in government. But that trial could not wash away all of Nano’s sins. Matters must be judged to the end. That is why the parliament after March 22 did not hesitate (with the exception of the Socialists) to vote to lift his immunity, handing Nano over to the Law. Professor Pashko and Perikli Teta, both members of the Bufi cabinet, also took this step without the slightest hesitation. Perhaps they had more reason than anyone to do so, because they were precisely the ones who denounced him first. In light of this fact, it is unclear why the indictment does not mention the first denunciation!

A few days ago, the Court of Cassation handed down the first life sentence. The decision was made in the case of the defendant Sami Kila, from Ishëm in Durrës, whom the district court had sentenced to death for the murder, motivated by revenge, of citizen Lush Stani. In its decision a few days ago, the Court of Cassation changed the district court’s ruling for this defendant, sentencing him to life imprisonment. In connection with this decision, the deputy president of the Court of Cassation, Avni Shehu, explained that this sentence was imposed on the defendant on the basis of the recent amendments made to the Criminal Procedure Code. This is the case. The reason for imposing this sentence is related to the restriction on imposing the death penalty, but this does not mean that the justice authorities will not apply such a sentence. To confirm this, Mr. Shehu explained that the Court of Cassation, only two days ago, after handing down the life sentence, also ruled to impose the death penalty on a criminal from Fier.

It often happens that a small, sometimes insignificant thing, begun for another purpose, can serve as an example for a more important issue that may be valuable to everyone, first and foremost to those who love their country and nation. That is what happened in Friday’s television program, in which “Eurobarometer” was discussed. It had recently been presented in Albania by a representative of the EC, and the participants included, besides Prime Minister Meksi, leading figures from Albania’s political parties and journalists from the main press organizations and RTSH, forming a round table. Unexpectedly, viewers were in for a pleasant surprise: the discussion and debate there were conducted in a cultured manner; the exchanges remained within the norms of political ethics, and there was even some humor. The important thing observed at this discussion table was that, on several key issues, different sides—including the PS—expressed shared or at least similar views, while disagreements on some of the issues under discussion were again expressed in moderate tones, far removed from the artificially heated atmosphere in Parliament, where debate and exchanges are often not based on clear ideas or defined programs, but are conducted too hastily. In this atmosphere, even Dokle, a Socialist regarded as a “hawk,” surprised viewers with his calmness and conciliatory tone, and with his reasonable views when he made observations, criticisms, and proposals. This is very important: under democracy, even when there are disagreements, it is possible to work together. (Continued on page 4)

Data on food imports entering Albania are being withheld Asked about the quantities of food products brought into Albania over a two-month period, specialists at the General Directorate of Customs say that this information is considered a state secret. They say the data are provided only to four main sources: the Presidency, the Prime Minister’s Office, the Ministry of Finance, and the Institute of Statistics. At the same time, the Institute of Statistics has not yet received these data. Traders are not interested in the bureaucratic side of this phenomenon. They want accurate information on the quantities and types of food products entering Albania during a given period, in order to determine the nature of their business. When this information is unavailable for the absurd reason that it is a “secret,” while at the same time it is regularly published in all countries ... (Continued on page 4)

If there was a reason not to legalize the (new) Albanian Communist Party, it was solely that communism had lost every historical and moral justification for competing within the current pluralist system. Over 30 years, it provided sufficient proof for people to say, “never again communism.” The fact that there are nevertheless people who want to continue with such a party shows that the struggle against it must never be considered won. The Socialist Party, as the bearer of this communist component, cannot be accepted in the same way as everyone else; whether willingly or unwillingly, it suffers precisely from this burden of the past. If this [burden?] were to be alleviated, the PS... (Continued on page 4)

If only words came out of the pocket too ... Photo: Armando Babani

In the lead article of our newspaper, “Are We for Capitalism?”, the sixth paragraph was printed with errors due to technical reasons. That paragraph should read: “Establishing an equal state today is a concept of socialist culture. One term: communism took people’s property and culture away from them, whereas capitalism is an even greater value. It is established through their effort and inventiveness, qualities they will have only during capitalist development. It is easier for them to exploit even there, in which also capitalist development. It is easier for them to exploit, at the time of the value of their property. This is what is given with the token, in grafting, key we do not give them at all, what we are doing with the land, in grafting, capitalism from communism and not to produce a fruitless tree, because from it does not let life begin...” We apologize for the error. THE EDITORIAL OFFICE

And the esteemed lady of the capital appeared before the court at 10 o’clock on Friday, by force as well! “You have to let me in,” she said. “The 1994 draft budget is being discussed, and I want to be there in place of Fatos Nanos.” “No,” the guards told her, “you can’t go in in his place because Mr. Nano does not have immunity.” “That isn’t true,” said the esteemed lady. “They really did strip him of his immunity, but I have immunity by birth. I am eternally irresponsible; that is, I am a deputy for eternity. A deputy until death. Besides, in the seat where I’ll sit, I won’t be any different from my colleagues.” “I have entrusted all my ideas and projects to the parliamentary group. This is no parliament where they can steal my ideas.” After that, the esteemed lady disappeared, only to show up again the next day at noon outside Tirana prison, delivering this speech: “Dear political prisoners and prisoners of conscience. Dear Aranit and dear Simon Stefan! You are living through the days of the great political prison. Your whole life has been persecuted, full of hardships and suffering. Have you ever had a single bright day? You, who tried so hard for this right to be respected! Because this people often forgets the good things. But don’t they remember Comrade Ramiz’s good deeds? And, you—don’t you remember Comrade Ramiz’s good deeds? And, you—don’t you remember Comrade Ramiz’s good deeds? And, you... . . . (text cut off/illegible).