. They have grown tired and hoarse debating whether the files should be opened or not. But perhaps, during the time they have wasted on this prolonged debate, some archival rats or officials have used their time to the fullest to destroy the core of these files and leave behind a few indecipherable scribbles, like fragments of ancient documents. Anyway, we hope and wish that they have not thrown everything of value into the crematorium furnaces—things that could help us unravel some old and new enigmas, and understand the lightning-fast evolution of some of the dictatorship’s leading actors or bit players into fiery partisans or standard-bearers of democracy. It is clear that our mountain of files is high, that Enver and his comrades turned the creation of files into an industry, and spared no expense on major investments, even when the people were suffering from a shortage of bread and the most essential foods. And perhaps this mountain is a task that will require a great deal of time, people, and further investment. On the other hand, in this extremely heated political and social climate, opening all the files could have consequences that are unimaginable for now; it could create problems that would trouble us for a long time. For some time, people have been discussing the alternative of partially opening the files, for politicians and government officials. That seems easier to deal with. But it has also become imperative, an urgent duty. The arrows of speculation and gossip, of pointless and unsubstantiated debates, pass by the ears or strike the bodies of some of today’s politicians and government officials of different political colors. Naturally, they swear by heaven and earth that they are clean. Just as their mothers gave birth to them, but our eyes, ears, and minds—judging their deeds more than their words—find no peace amid the great and small suspicions, the unanswered whys and question marks, or the exceedingly vague answers. Some tell us proudly that they are “true socialists,” “great patriots,” “honorable citizens,” “ardent defenders of [?]” and their privileges; while they have attached themselves to democracy, they served the dictatorship, inspiring or carrying out open or secret divisive activities within the PD and the democratic front in general; while making themselves into chest-thumping groups and boasting of being great patriots, they have become traders in national interests. But how long are we to put up with these two-faced people, who have turned duplicity into an art and a business? Opening the files of these political adventurers or mercenaries is urgent, because it will silence them, but it will also save the people from their irritating provocations. For more than a year, Fronti Çupi has been seen as a hero of democracy, as a victim of the PD. Opening his file would clarify whether he has been unfairly persecuted or whether he is a snake who could have slipped into the bosom of democracy and coiled there. Opening the files could answer our questions about the great intimacy between Neritan Ceka and Irakli Kocollari. They have been seen going into the villas on Mount Dajti or at Marikaj. Could it be that they went somewhere just for lunch? Why, then, do they try to arrange these meetings in complete secrecy? If they have had no secret conversations, they could have met in the middle of Tirana, since their friendship is no longer a surprise to many Tirana residents. It is now known that Mr. Neritan Ceka wanted to organize a “historic” meeting in Elbasan. With his own forces, or with the support of Irakli Kocollari’s emissaries as well? This grand plan remained only on paper, as was always the case with Enver and Ramiz. It is well known that Mr. Neshat Tozaj, as someone very well informed about the things being cooked up in the Sigurimi’s kitchen, has spoken about other people’s files. Can we rule out the possibility that his colleagues also opened a file on him? If one exists, when it is opened Neshat’s character will be brought fully into the light of day, and the suspicions, speculations, gossip, and insinuations that trouble him and the wider public will also come to an end. Insinuations have also been made about Mr. Preç Zogaj. The shadow of suspicion has weighed on his reputation too. Opening his file could shed light on everything; it could ultimately whiten or blacken his reputation. We could continue with the names of other public figures of different political colors, but the operation to open the files must also be carried out for central and local government officials, as well as for everyone doing their utmost to destabilize the country, sabotage reform, and cause destabilization. This is in the interest of the present and the future. The status of public office should be held only by people of unimpeachable character in every respect. pure. just as people have tied them together, but our eyes, ears, and minds; judging more by their deeds than by their words; we find no peace amid great or small doubts, amid the whys and question marks without clear answers or with answers that are far too vague. Some sell themselves to us and boast that they are «true socialists», «great patriots», «honest citizens», «fervent defenders, ready even for self-sacrifice, of the people’s interests». Others beat their chests on podiums or publish entire pages of newspapers to convince us that they are born, untainted democrats, melting like a candle for democracy and the people. But, according to the infallible philosophy of the people, one is judged by deeds and not by words. And when we carefully analyze their deeds with sharp, cool eyes, it quickly becomes clear to us that these people are not what their words make them out to be. While they have spoken of the people’s interests, they have fought fiercely and with every weapon for the loo-

Yesterday at 11 a.m., the PD deputy chairman, Mr. Azem Hajdari, held a press conference, requested by him, to clarify matters for the public regarding his trip to the USA for specialized training, as well as some other issues that arose from the meeting of the PD National Council. At the outset, Hajdari spoke about television’s repeated absence and said that television had censored him on other occasions as well. Nevertheless, Mr. Hajdari continued, I grant TV amnesty. Journalists know very well who has the right to grant amnesty. Later, speaking again about the local elections, he said they had been free and that the people voted as they saw fit. Peoples, he said, tend to be conservative in national politics, but liberal when it comes to local government. Hajdari stressed that he distanced himself from Pashko’s statement about his departure for the USA, but added that a member of parliament has the right to say what he wants. I, he continued, support the PD and will fight within it, even as an ordinary member. From the USA I had two conversations with the President and the Prime Minister, to whom I once again expressed my support for the government and congratulated them on their victories in the July 26 elections. As for the government, Hajdari stressed that he had not only refrained from calling for its overthrow, but, on the contrary, would take a stand against anyone who sought to do so. Asked about Arben Imami’s motion, Mr. Hajdari said that Imami presented it to the National Council, not in the street. Undoubtedly, he said, Blerim Çela’s supporters [statement unclear in source] about the public stance toward Çekas, Pashkos, and Çupis. Azem Hajdari then replied that B. Çela joined the PD to fight corruption and that, at a time when millions of dollars shape Albanian politics, he is looking for a few meters of stolen pipe. Asked about Mr. Nano’s press conference, at which he stressed that Albania was threatened by revanchism, and where Hajdari saw this revanchism, he replied that he had always declared himself against the PS and had never supported Nano. Asked what, in his view, was the danger facing Albania: the government’s effort to carry out democratic reform, or the high percentage of votes won by yesterday’s former communists and the destabilization caused by a group of power-hungry careerists, he replied that democracy had won in Albania and that he saw no danger of anti-communism, since some PS intellectuals had also declared themselves against it. Asked whom he would prefer for the justice bodies—corrupt people and former criminals, or people initially lacking professional training—Hajdari replied that it had been said at the National Council that people with only a basic education could also be appointed to these bodies. This was a proposal by Blerim Çela, which was put into the President’s mouth. But I am sure, he said, that the National Council will never approve such a thing. Regarding B. Çela’s claim that there was no longer one party but two, the deputy chairman said there was only one party, called the PD. Arben Imami’s motion conforms to the PD line, apart from a few things that are personal reflections. Regarding the recording of a telephone call involving A. Hajdari, the latter stressed that this was illegal and that those responsible should be held accountable. Apparently, he continued, the Sigurimi’s and intelligence agencies’ bugging devices still will not leave us alone. It is a fabrication, said the deputy chairman, and I, as chairman of the Parliamentary Commission for SHIK and Public Order, will establish a commission to investigate the matter. Asked whether the PD statute provided for the suspension of people who signed the motion, he replied in the negative. Asked which extremist faction he would classify President Berisha in, the PD deputy chairman said that the President belonged to no faction. He was elected by the people. The PD is led by Eduard Selami. The President, meanwhile, leads the people! “RD” correspondent on the contrary, will take a stand against anyone who seeks such a thing. had presented it to the National Council, not on the street. “Without doubt,” he said, “I believe in Arben Imami’s honor, as a founder of the DP.” Asked how he explained the fact that «RD» classified him among the «moderates», when he emphasized that he belonged to no clan, he replied: “The moment «RD» published the list of Democrats, I would be a pseudo-democrat.” Asked by a journalist to clarify Answer: At the press conference, it was as if that Azem we had kept in our thoughts over these past 2–3 years had vanished. We do not want to accept such a thing; therefore, if you would, please clarify your future position to us at least somewhat. All this while recognizing that we have no Gramoz’s statement «RD» correspondent.

At yesterday’s press conference, Mr. Hajdari accused RTSH of not broadcasting him. We would like to remind Mr. Hajdari that, as a member of parliament, he voted for the independence of RTSH, and he should also know that this institution’s regulations allow only press conferences by party leaders to be broadcast. Yesterday, Mr. Hajdari, in his capacity as PD deputy chairman, was not entitled to have his conference broadcast; therefore, he is asking for something illegal. In a state governed by the rule of law, no one is favored. Everyone is equal. THE OBSERVER

— FROM MR. TRITAN SHEHU’S SPEECH AT THE MEETING OF THE PD NATIONAL COUNCIL — The Democratic Party, during this election campaign, showed some weaknesses in its structures, from the center down to the grassroots—weaknesses that require these structures to be reorganized as quickly as possible. In the overwhelming majority of cases, the failure of operations was caused by the lack of action by the PD’s governing bodies. I can say without reservation that this is mainly attributable to the poor work of a lobby within the PD leadership, which ultimately did not prevent the PD from winning this election campaign. This lobby, which has now crystallized, has a carefully worked-out strategy and tactics and is trying with all its strength to carry them out in alliance with the PS. These people preach and claim that the PD circle is revanchist? Right-wing, thereby seeking to attack prominent PD activists such as Dosti, Toto, Haci, etc. It is clear that this is being done to divert attention from their principal aim: rapprochement with socialism. The main idea supported by these people is in complete alignment with the PS’s main idea and ultimately takes the form of efforts to create a coalition government with the PS—that is, it is linked to nostalgia for the government of stability. They have made these things connected with a desire to overlook much of the corruption of the government of stability; it is linked to the desire to continue along this path, to careerism, to the desire to make it impossible to uncover the crimes of the past and to ensure that the PS does not lose all its economic power. This group, like the PS, knows that neither can govern the country alone, and therefore they seek one another’s support. This led many of our leaders to sabotage the election campaign, because they wanted the PD to lose it, which, in their view, would have created a balance between the political forces and thus led to a coalition government. They tried to achieve this through positions and actions that ran counter to the PD’s political line. I can say without reservation that this idea existed even before the March 22 elections. We are all witnesses to what the so-called influential figures of the PS and ZP, together with PD representatives such as Frok Cupi, Prec Zogaj, Shahin Kadare, etc., said about S. Berisha in the press and in various social settings—not to mention N. Ceka’s statements. They were convinced that anything that happened to S. Berisha would make way for another leader, weaken the PD, and make the creation of a coalition government possible. This is the basis of the extraordinary coherence between the voices of ZP and those of the so-called government of stability; it is linked to democracy. None of us has forgotten their attempts to manipulate matters during the days of the PD National Congress in order to bring down S. Berisha. I am convinced that this lobby did not want the PD’s victory on March 22 at all. What they wanted was a balanced election result that would inevitably lead to a coalition government. I cannot fail to mention the great efforts they made to prevent the withdrawal from the government of stability, and to block the petition by intellectuals in support of that decision—that is, to perpetuate the sharing of power with the PS. Throughout this campaign, this group was supported by several dubious people from outside, who appeared on our political scene on March 22, claiming that they could also become PD members of parliament. It remains to be clarified for what purpose these political figures were invited, and in connection with the departure of N. Ceka from the political scene. So, in conclusion, I emphasize once again that, in my opinion, the political basis of these PD members, who have today come forward with an open platform, lies in the desire to preserve an alliance with the PS and create a shared form of government—in other words, ultimately, to share power with it.

I would betray myself, and all those who followed you in the march against communism, Mr. Azem, if I were to doubt even for a moment your role in overthrowing the dictatorship in Albania. Undoubtedly, you were one of the “heroes” of the rallies and of open dialogue with the people. Indeed, it seemed that you remained Azem even when you rose at the PD National Council and said explicitly: “Who said that Azem Hajdari was left unfulfilled because he did not receive power after March 22? I repeat once again: it is not that they did not give me power; it is that I myself have not deserved power. Today and for another 100 years, I will not have the ability to take power. My ability is well known: I am able to engage in dialogue with people, with the people...” It is entirely honorable for a person to ask for as much as he feels he deserves. It is undoubtedly the best thing, the greatest talent, when a person knows himself and understands his own worth, abilities, and inclinations. Otherwise, he loses ground every day in people’s eyes, even in the eyes of those who loved and followed him, those who applauded him and carried him on their shoulders. At least until now, you, Azem Hajdari, have respected yourself by presenting yourself as who you are. But... At the press conference, it was as if the Azem we have remembered over these past two or three years had disappeared. We do not want to accept such a thing, and therefore we would like you to clarify your future position for us, at least somewhat. This is without denying the right to trample on what you have done so far to bring democracy to Albania. 1. You distanced yourself from Gramoz Pashko’s statement about your departure for America, spoke against Neritën Ceka, said that you support President Berisha and the Meksi Government to the end, and yet, at this press conference, we did not understand: Whom were you against? 2. You, who have undoubtedly been the most active in pursuing the most radical changes in Albania (the most attacked, even insulted by “ZP”), now come out against right-wing extremism. Against whom is “right-wing extremism” directed, other than against left-wing extremism and the most prominent representatives of the communist dictatorship in Albania? Why is this so surprising? 3. You are rightly proud of your father, who was also a communist, but an honest man, untainted, never a criminal, and never responsible for those crimes for which the true culprits would be accused under the law and by a democratic state governed by the rule of law. Who has made all the innocent mothers of the PPSH guilty? Who has called for trials merely because they were deceived by communist propaganda? Have you forgotten that you yourself have said more than once that the national liberation war often turned into a civil war? And you know very well who its victims were. Then why are you uncomfortable when the persecuted want to make their contribution within the PD? Surely, that does the PD credit; it is no disgrace. 4. Do you not feel responsible for having yourself left for training at the beginning of the election campaign, when July 26 was directly connected with the decisive battle against communism and neo-communism? Are not the other members of the Presidium also responsible, when they themselves declared that (Continued on page 4)

The Democratic Party will not shirk the responsibility it has assumed: