“I can say that I voted for this constitution from the moment we, as a Commission, put the final touches to the Draft.” With Mr. Zef Brozi, President of the Court of Cassation — The referendum has now been announced. What is your general opinion of it, and what are its advantages compared with the constituent assembly and Parliament? — As is known, I have publicly expressed my support for the Referendum as the best way to adopt Albania’s new constitution. I made this statement several months before the debate on the procedure for adopting the constitution began, in an interview I gave to “Gazeta Shqiptare”. At the time I expressed a personal opinion, but I am pleased that the President of the Republic found the most democratic and best solution under today’s circumstances. I think this is the best solution for several reasons: — First, the referendum is an opportunity given to every Albanian citizen with the right to vote to express their will on the constitution. Second, popular sovereignty—one of the ways in which it is expressed—is the referendum. In other words, the path is that of the referendum. Third, given today’s political climate, in which goodwill is lacking, I believe the referendum will be, so to speak, a shock absorber for all political passions. The people should express their own view on the Constitution. I believe that the people, who have their own independent judgment and cannot simply be represented by 140 MPs, will know how to vote on the constitution and will know not to fall prey to political resentments. Because the constitution is a legal act that regulates relations between… — Some political forces rely on Article 16/2 of the Main Constitutional Provisions and speak of the need to repeal this article before the referendum is held. In short, they allege that the constitution is being violated. As a lawyer, what is your opinion on this matter? — I believe that the President’s announcement of the referendum is not at all a violation… (continued on page 3)

Dr. ÇERÇIZ MINGOMATAJ The unpleasant thought is crystallizing in our minds that our Parliament is degenerating into a voting machine. In our Parliament, things are not “decided”; rather, what is demanded by certain political circles or alliances is “achieved”. The conclusion inevitably follows that Parliament, this essential element of democracy, is deficient. We think that, as we see and hear, we should not have so much respect for “institutions”, but should have much more for people and their rights. It is accepted that equality of rights is a human right; that is, an individual’s fundamental rights and freedom protect people from “pressures”, including those exerted by the state. Our Parliament voted for a referendum on the constitution. The reactions are well known. They can be summed up in two words: Is the referendum a road to dictatorship or a road to democracy? Many things have been said and many more will be said, but we believe these are the points that need to be understood: 1. The referendum must not be understood as a trick to move away from party consensus, but as a way of reaching it. 2. For the constitution to be approved, party consensus is absolutely necessary. 3. This Parliament, as we said above, has neither the will nor the quality to achieve an understanding. [The text here is damaged/garbled: “Letërm”] …open and honest dialogue with those who oppose reaching a common decision. …continually in tense relations, but in any case they define and threaten one another. This field, burdened by the state, free and open, constitutes a permanent threat and an obstacle to the balance between the demand for individual, group, or (social) party “autonomy” and, on the other hand, the demand for order and obedience. This tension requires balance, and that balance can never be perfect or long-lasting. Nevertheless, only a constitutional state governed by the rule of law offers the citizen (who feels their duty as a citizen) a good opportunity to be legitimized within this state and to create and find a balance between desires and needs, on the one hand, and obligations, on the other. Referring to the second point, I believe that a democratic state needs the political support of society in order to become an effective guardian of democracy and freedom. In these… to bring it closer. 2. For the Constitution to be approved, the parties’ consensus is absolutely necessary. 3. That this parliament, mentioned above, has neither the will nor the capacity to achieve an understanding. We live in a pluralist state. But the real democratic value of this pluralism would lie precisely in democracy has had a hesitation and is failing to defend itself properly against anti-democracy. As a result, we and our state are also losing consistency in current policy. Let us return to the three points above. The state is an instrument in the service of people and society, and never an end in itself. The state and society are [unclear] by party consensus on a way to reach it. are

The issue of autonomy for the Greek minority in Albania has recently become dominant, but the views of politicians prevail on this issue. But what do historians say? Two historians, Mr. Filip Liço and Mr. Pëllumb X-hufi, were invited to the BBC studio to discuss this. — Mr. Filip, your organization recently sent a letter to the President of the Republic, the Speaker of the People’s Assembly, and the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, stating explicitly that a Greek minority lives in Albania on its ancestral lands and has preserved its identity, traditions, language, and culture for thousands of years. What historical arguments would prove this? — In recent years, when the question was raised of the change of the 18th century during the time of Ali Pashë Tepelena. We believe that this argument is unfounded, and it relies on Pouqueville, who was the French consul in Janina during the time of Ali Pashë Tepelena and, in his multi-volume work, deals with the people’s question. On pages 318–355 of the fifth volume, he discusses traditions and customs. In this work he gives a chronicle provided to him by the intellectuals of Gjirokastër; so, if there had been a displacement at that time, it would… [Text breaks off/garbled] …of the Byzantine Empire worked their own lands, and with the arrival of the Turkish conquerors these were taken from them and given to Albanian farmers and aghas. — Mr. Xhufi, historians’ view and the official position is that this minority is… (continued on page 4) thousands of years. But what historical arguments would substantiate this? — In recent years, when the issue of land division was raised, some right-wing newspapers and some members of parliament expressed the view that minority villagers should be given land for use, not ownership. In response, the Omonia MP raised the question of the minority’s indigenous status. Those who raised this issue rely on the Albanian Encyclopedic Dictionary, which states on page 211 that the members of the minority arrived as farm laborers in

With Mr. Agim Gjoleka, member of the Court of Cassation The Constitution should be approved by referendum. — Political forces hold differing views on the unconstitutionality of the referendum. What is your opinion? — On the basis of the existing provisions of the law “On the Main Constitutional Provisions”—which were in force when today’s opposition held a majority in Parliament, and which differ directly from what Mr. Kastriot Islami says—there is no obstacle to approving the constitution by referendum. Article 16, paragraph 7, of Law No. 7491, dated 29.04.1991, states: “The Assembly decides on the referendum.” Likewise, Article 28, paragraph 4, of the same law states that the President promulgates the laws and referendums decided by the People’s Assembly. As you know, these provisions have been fully implemented. — What is your opinion of the referendum? — The referendum is one of the ways of expressing the will of the people, so it seems entirely right to me that various issues of national importance, such as the Constitution, should be approved by referendum.

Dokle and the Republican MP, Professor Mehmet Çeliku, do indeed belong to the same parliament, but they belong to different political parties. Neither of them belongs to the Democratic Party. One is in the PS (the legitimate continuation of the PPSH), and the other in the Republican Party, a party of the Albanian Right. Dokle has his own past; he completed the Party School, was editor-in-chief of “Zëri i Popullit”, was also a rival of Ramiz Alia for the presidency of the Republic, and has… walked out of Parliament many times (and what could he do? He came back there again!). The intellectual Çeliku might have passed over Dokle’s accusations in tolerant silence, as calm people generally pass over the ravings of political youngsters; Professor Çeliku might perhaps tolerate “Republika” newspaper’s “defence” of him without his permission. The truth is that he does not need this defence. He would not, for example, claim to have known Dokle’s views on the archaic and blind politics of the “socialists’” deputy chairman. Çeliku, even if he were not an MP, is much more…; but what would little Dokle be if he were not a deserter from parliamentarism? The “learned” Dokle, who was once against curtailing the powers of his rival, the young President Alia, is now “tired” of Berisha’s powers! Is Dokle’s naivety Çeliku’s fault?! What will poor Dokle do now, when, as one can sense, other PS leaders too are distancing themselves from the spiritual leader of the last communists?! Çeliku is an MP for the PR, not a PR mannequin (as Dokle was used by the PPSH), and how could he not support the PD or President Berisha, when it is understood that the struggle against communism can continue only if it is… [text corrupt]. Dokle, as a graduate of the Party School and of “Zëri i Popullit”, should understand at least that much! Just as he should understand the opposite case too: when Çeliku votes and speaks against the “Law on Agricultural Land”, even though the PD votes for it—curiously, in step with the PS. These are first-grade lessons in pluralist politics, my esteemed Dokle! “REPUBLIKA”

Press conference of President Berisha It is the people who decide, and we should all be pleased that we are establishing the institution of the referendum and confident that, by a qualified majority, the Albanian Constitution will be approved—more than anything, to affirm Albania. Its greatest absolute potential lies in freedom, in democracy, and so President Berisha stated, among other things, at the press conference held on Monday, October 10, 1994. At this press conference, he commented on all the important issues that have recently arisen in connection with the president’s decree on approving the Constitution and the referendum. He rejected the description of the referendum as a “constitutional coup,” emphasizing that the referendum is precisely the highest institution of democracy, and also that “the Constitution is a vital and partisan institution, just as the referendum is partisan.” In addition to questions about the approval of the Constitution, President Berisha was also available to journalists for questions on other topics. He commented on the development of tensions with Greece and the liberal [unclear] regarding a possible breakdown and the gradual, ongoing severing of Tirana’s dialogue, and on his position in favor of opening up to any initiative that does not harm the country’s interests. He also commented on the elections in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, etc. Republic correspondent

From sources that cannot be identified, we learn that the “NANO dossier” was also discussed at a meeting of the General Steering Committee of the Socialist Party. At first, a few individual speakers, and then a larger number of speakers, in fact expressed the view that enough was enough with Nano. It was said that this issue, inflated for political purposes at a certain time, would now put the PS itself at risk. Nano is only one of the PS’s members, it was said there, and the fact that he is being held by the Justice system does not mean that all of us should have to sacrifice ourselves for him. Insisting on the “Nano issue” makes it seem as though we cannot manage without him, which is true. After all, Nano is well known in Tirana as a scion of the old class that had power and its time. There is no reason for us to mythologize his role, much less his [unclear] barricade, and we should wait for him to do something for our party. He did not know Albanian reality, one of this party’s leaders said of Nano, and with his positions he put the PS itself in a difficult position. This atmosphere was also evident at a large meeting of this PS leader in Laç. Something was said about Nano’s merits, too, but the fact that some shortcomings were also listed suggests that the PS will also implement what has been said for years: “let the living deal with the living, and the dead with the dead”—a phrase repeated about the late Enver! There is much speculation of various kinds, but that is all the “source” had to report this time. And that is all we can write! Correspondent: “Republika”

“What did we think?” said the madwoman N. “We went mad for the second time. I heard that the Socialists had abandoned Parliament, but the next day I saw Socialists at meetings of the parliamentary committees! Another leader, from another parliamentary party, (neither here nor there) was interviewed, not as a leader of pluralism, but as a former minister under Enver Hoxha! (Are they mad, or am I? Why do they themselves reopen old wounds?) How many times have we agreed and said that the judicial bodies in Albania are not independent, and yet they go and file lawsuits in those very courts! They will get their answer after the voting on the Constitution is over. Then they will put the people on trial. They will accuse the people of populism! I am a mad leftist, said the madwoman N. They have invited me, too, to the Left Parliament, which will be defined as [unclear]. Its chairman will be the all-inclusive Kastriot Islami. Namik Dokle will be elected president because his leading rival, R. Alia, is in prison. He has asked not to be given extensive powers and has proposed that Albania be declared a People’s Socialist Republic. I will become a matchmaker, the madwoman N added. I will become a matchmaker to unite the two left-wing parties. Their members may not want it, but I do, and so do their leaders; I’ll take the leftist’s shoes—or die! The kiosk owners have decided to elect the mayors themselves. This will be done to combat corruption. On this occasion, kiosks will be opened on the ground floors of every municipal building. Services will be provided there free of charge. The left-wing newspapers have completely forgotten the collection, said the madwoman N; now they are talking about a constitutional coup. I say there is a risk; they say there is a risk of coups! Janullatos will vote for the Constitution on November 6. On November 7… the voting result will be announced! On November 7 I, too, will ask for a temporary visa, said the madwoman N. Because, after all, we are all temporary on this earth. THE CHRONICLER

October 19–20 Second Congress of the Albanian Republican Party

The President of the Republic, Mr. Sali Berisha, acting under Article 28, paragraph 4, of Law No. 7491, dated 29.04.1991, “On the Main Constitutional Provisions”, announced on Tuesday, October 11, the People’s Referendum on the approval of the Draft Constitution, as decided by the People’s Assembly on October 10, 1994. On the same day, the President of the Republic, pursuant to Article 6 of the “Law on the Referendum”, designated Sunday, November 6, 1994, as the date for holding Republic correspondent