Dictatorship against crime The two recent killings, whose victims were Commissioner Gyjerezi and prison director Bujar Kaloshi, are the gravest challenge crime has posed to the state. These killings and a series of attacks—not to mention threats against justice officials by various criminals—show that the state is entirely under the rule of the criminal world. This is the consequence of certain sectors of the state accommodating certain categories of crime that, at first glance, are not directly aimed against it. Thus, the inadequate fight against drug trafficking and certain types of smuggling, the indifference, and even the disregard shown by certain police officers toward the trafficking of undocumented migrants have allowed criminal organizations to grow stronger step by step and establish supremacy over the forces of law and order. The financial strengthening of various criminal groups has created favorable conditions for them to deploy the weapon of corruption as well, taking advantage of the low salaries allocated to the sectors fighting crime, to judges, and above all to police officers, who risk their lives—a fact that, as the latest attacks have shown, makes their position entirely unsafe. Among other things, this situation has created conflict between the police and the courts. The courts are accused of not sentencing criminals apprehended by the police, while the judges themselves complain that the police provide insufficient evidence and facts. But this matter should not be viewed so simply, by limiting it to this aspect alone. Above all, the fight against crime must be based on a drastic increase in the severity of punishment for certain categories of crime, first and foremost murder. There is no doubt that democracy in Albania has not been properly understood, and the term democracy is being abused, among other things, in the conflict between the police and the courts. The courts are accused of not sentencing criminals apprehended by the police, while the judges themselves complain that the police provide insufficient evidence and facts. But this matter should not be viewed so simply, by limiting it to this aspect alone. Above all, the fight against crime must be based on a drastic increase in the severity of punishment for certain categories of crime, first and foremost murder. There is no doubt that democracy in Albania has not been properly understood, and the term democracy is also being abused in the fight against crime. As regards freedom of speech, freedom of association, and so on, unfortunately many people—including state officials—seem to legitimize the freedom to harm individuals, even to take their lives. Without examining our country’s actual circumstances in any depth, various politicians and governmental and non-governmental organizations, also facing certain demands from international institutions, are exerting pressure to abolish the death penalty. But the level of democratic education in Albania makes such a thing impossible. Look around and see what is happening, while the death penalty still exists on paper. At this stage we have reached, abolishing the death penalty and generally softening punishments means that very soon we will find ourselves in a situation in which the state is nothing more than a relic. This becomes all the more possible if one also takes into account the low standard of our justice institutions, which are easily manipulated by the defenders of criminals. Our people have a wise saying: “Fear keeps the vineyards safe.” It was fear that had brought blood feuds to an end during the communist dictatorship. Democracy does not rule out imposing a “dictatorship” against crime; in this respect, the death penalty is one of the most effective means of making wrongdoers curb their initiatives to attack the state and the individual, who currently feels unprotected by the state. It is a mistake to make comparisons in this regard with advanced countries that have developed democracies. The only comparison that can be made is with the conditions in those countries 100 or more years ago. Then we will see that none of those who now call for the abolition of the death penalty would dare take such a step. A.D.

Cassation’s mysterious “delay” The Court of Cassation, convened on Wednesday, 10 July 1996, heard Mr. Emir Qafa’s petition and decided to grant it and annul the decision of the State Commission for the Verification of the Backgrounds of Officials and Other Persons, dated 17 April 1996. The Court of Cassation’s decision was made after the archival documentation of the Ministry of Public Order and SHIK was verified; it showed that Mr. Emir Qafa had not been an informant for the State Security, but had been a person pursued and surveilled by it. Continued on p. 4

The third message from Bënça reaches the PS The Socialist leader strikes again within his own party, this time by name The third message from Bënça reaches the PS. Nano declares a fight to the death. The third message from Bënça reaches the PS Nano declares a fight to the death The Socialist leader attacks his own party again, this time by name In his letter yesterday to the PS and the press, he reveals the PS’s declaration—that it is Pellumbi and Dokle, but mainly the former. “I began the renewal withdrawal as far back as March 1992—Nano says in his letter—starting with the removal of Marx. But it was Prof. Servet Pellumbi who objected, saying that Marx’s presence in the program would help us win part of the electorate.” Thus the Socialist leader strongly attacks Pellumbi, portraying him as the principal anti-reformer in the Socialist Party. The Professor’s great love for Marx was evident until recently, until he made his famous about-face by himself proposing Marx’s removal from the PS program. But when everyone thought Serveti had been defeated—he had even announced his resignation at the congress—the philosopher of communism rose again and took charge of the situation, defeating Nano’s motion and going so far as to make the latest declaration: In the PS, it is either me or Nano. So that the left-wing leader would attack— Continued on p. 2

What are some of the characteristics of government-opposition relations today P. 4 Communists “seize” the Tirana Court again P. 3