All kinds of versions were talked about and invented regarding that truth, which perhaps for a very long time had been covered by the mystery and secrecy of the files. Many Albanians knew or sensed the bitter truths about the recent and distant past, but did not even dare to mention them. If the truth were told, prison, internment, or worse would surely await you. In those circumstances, every file and every secret that came to light cost dearly the person who made it public. It took the major changes in our lives for people to feel the need to know the truth of that time and to demand accountability. The files have become part of public debate, because they are linked to human destinies, political and moral responsibility, and the crimes and injustices committed during the previous regime. It took not one but several years of freedom to understand that without shedding light on the past there can be no real reconciliation, no public morality, and no healthy democracy. It is precisely the files that can help separate the victim from the executioner, the persecuted from the persecutor, the honest citizen from the collaborator of the repressive apparatus. This is not revenge, but historical justice. There have also been voices calling for silence, claiming that opening the files would bring division. But division has long existed, hidden beneath the surface. It is not healed by keeping silent, but by acknowledging the truth. Democracy has no reason to fear light; only those who have reason to hide fear it. If Albanian society wishes to move forward honestly, without the burden of deceit and mystery, it must have the courage to open the files. Only in this way can collective memory be cleansed, responsibilities individualized, and history no longer used as a tool of manipulation. The time has come to open the files.

Also on July 11, in the daily Koha Jonë, a rebuttal of a statement by Mr. Azem Hajdari, deputy chairman of the PD, was published. Specifically, one day after Mr. Sali Berisha had decided to appoint him to the post of chairman of the Parliamentary Committee on National Order, in place of Mr. Zef Brozi, Mr. Hajdari was asked whether he would leave the post of head of the SHISH and he replied that “I do not recognize such a decision”. Further on, the article discusses other statements, reactions from the opposition, and different political positions concerning the events of the day. The material mentions the well-known political clashes of the time, the difficulties of the transition, and the debates that accompanied parliamentary life. In the end, it is stressed that the press conference aimed to clarify public opinion on several widely discussed issues, as well as to set out a political stance on the accusations and misinterpretations circulating in the press.

Before Democracy (for the socialist journalists, one would say) they call scandalous the obstinacy of “RD”, which does not back down from its position on the SHIK issue. It is supposedly condemnable that the “far-right extremists” want transvestitism[?]. Below, the article writes about a series of reactions from the press, about the way events are treated, and about what the author considers complete alignment of positions with those of the Socialist Party. The article deals with the polemics of the press of the time, with ideological interpretations, and with the mutual accusations between the left and the right. At the center is the criticism of a type of journalism that, according to the text, takes sides politically and distorts the facts. It is emphasized that instead of impartial information, the public is offered insinuations and labels, which harms democratic debate and transparency.

DO NOT LOSE THE PEOPLE, MR. AZEM HAJDARI! The attack for your day in America was launched against Neritan Ceka, I said they would make him Minister of Foreign Affairs in the Socialist Party’s shadow cabinet. Didn’t he need greater power to see? Thus, no one understands why he became such an eager defender of the SHIK “political office”, as well as of the very same socialist leader who told the public that the SHIK public office is a “political office of the PD”. Even “RD”, in an article dated 7.8.92, commented that “they must have made a deal and even fixed the posts in the future cabinet,” calling the rapprochement between them inevitable. In these circumstances, the question arises whether these political moves will affect popular support and the coherence of the positions taken so far. The text is a direct political appeal, filled with polemical tones and criticism of the suspected alliances. In the end, the author addresses Hajdari with an appeal not to cut himself off from the people and from the expectations of the electorate.

THE FIGHT AGAINST COMMUNISM AND THE CONSOLIDATION OF DEMOCRACY

VERHUESI[?]

Read it is[?] too many times!