Today, in the hall of the National Historical Museum in Tirana, at 10:00, the meeting of the National Council of the DPA is holding its proceedings.

In the presence of journalists from the Albanian and foreign press and mass media, yesterday at midday the President of the Republic, Sali Berisha, held a press conference, whose focus was political analysis following the announcement of the results of the 6 November Referendum. “At the outset of his remarks, President Berisha said: ‘I consider this campaign an achievement for Democracy. But, naturally, the Referendum and 6 November also carry very important messages, which must be assessed and taken into account. The first message is that on 6 November Albanians achieved a great victory for their democracy and gave legitimacy to the institution of the Referendum, through which they will approve this Constitution, approve laws, and make major decisions. Thus, Berisha continued, in my view and according to my conviction, 6 November is a victory for democracy for the Albanian people. It is true that on 6 November Albanians did not vote on the Constitution, but this must be taken into consideration. Second, the “NO” vote is to some extent a protest against the Reform; it is an electorate protesting against the Reform. Why protest against the Reform? For many reasons: perhaps the Reform has genuinely caused them such pain that they have still not recovered spiritually, and we must be aware of this; or this electorate wants the Reform to move faster. Or it is calling for an administration and governance that are more efficient, and a more active fight against corruption. I cannot say what percentage of the vote was a protest. I have not read the mind of each person to know. But I tell you that these people, too, will be taken seriously into account. So, the things that must be taken into account fall into three areas: First, accelerate the reform; Second, the Government should make an effort to ease its hardships; Third, the administration must be improved and strengthened in its weak links, and the fight against corruption strengthened. Two proposals: first, take into account the observations of the Council of Europe, which is essential because they seemed to me—and are—fair observations; and second, since, as I understand it, the main debate between the political forces has concerned the separation of powers, I put forward the proposal that we choose one of the 15 models used by European Union member states for the separation of powers and institutional division. This is because each of these parliamentary democracies has clearly demonstrated a successful democracy. In all these countries, whose constitutions have been established, if there is the goodwill to give Albania a Constitution as soon as possible, there is also the possibility for Parliament to authorize the existing Commission to reflect the observations of the Council of Europe and those that may have been made during extensive discussions in Albania. Alongside these, it should agree on one of the institutional models and then present it to the sovereign people as soon as possible. One thing I would like to add,” President Berisha concluded, “is that in every scenario one thing is certain: the Referendum can never be avoided, and there is the goodwill for Albania to have may have been made during extensive discussions in Albania. ANSWER — Parliament will approve the Constitutional Commission. This is not, and has never been, within the President’s competence. I believe it is the democratic duty and obligation of all individuals to respect verdicts and laws. If the people voted “NO” to the Constitution, they did not vote no to Parliament, because the people were not called to vote in parliamentary elections; they were called to vote on the Constitution. Therefore, combining these two matters has no legal basis. I would suggest that all parliamentary parties be represented on the Constitutional Commission, with our best experts, chosen by consensus among the political forces. The answer to the second question was given by the team from the Constitutional Commission. Personally, I have followed the assessments of foreign experts very closely, as there has been a personal issue of this kind. My entire commitment has been, is, and will remain the Constitution. This commitment stems from the great desire for this people to have a Constitution and for people to love this Constitution. We all come from a society that did not love its Constitution, because the Constitution of the communist dictatorship stated that the monopoly on power belonged to the Party of Labour. In other words, that Constitution contained the laws of our spiritual, material, political, and overall misfortune. Now I consider it extremely important for Albanians to love the Constitution. And I am encouraged by the 42 percent who voted in favor of the Constitution, because they came to love it. There was no kind of coercion; each person was free. I am convinced that in the next Referendum, the figure of 42 will become a higher percentage, because the question of love and respect for the Constitution is increasingly an extremely important issue for the future of Democracy. [Question:] On the Constitution before 28 January, the day the Council of Europe will meet? —Second, you have just said that the Referendum campaign was among the most civilized. How do you comment on opposition rallies often being broken up by the security forces? ANSWER: —I am absolutely calm; I have always been against any kind of disruption of the meetings of any political force. I think everyone who observed and followed this campaign has reached the firm conclusion that these violations were the result of its excesses. —I think the security forces deserve praise in this campaign, which passed without incident. Regarding the second question, as a quick and feasible mechanism I have suggested that Parliament authorize the existing Commission to incorporate the observations more quickly, by consensus, into one of the models I mentioned. The Referendum is also unavoidable; it must be organized, and that would be a... not vote on the Constitution, but on 6 November they showed a high degree of responsibility toward their country and democracy. They demonstrated this through their massive participation in the Referendum, one of the highest ever recorded. I also consider this an achievement for Albanian democracy. On 6 November people voted on the Constitution, and the Constitution received a “NO.” This “NO” appears to have strong tendencies toward politicization. I think this “NO” to the Constitution also deserves analysis, interpretation, and attention in order to understand its messages. What was this “NO”? Why did the sovereign express a “NO”? Did it do so in the interests of a party? It is absurd to think so. The sovereign was non-partisan; the people are everything. So how did this “NO” come about, and why? There are several explanations. First, we must be realistic: this “NO” is a vote of dissatisfaction with the draft Constitution. A certain percentage of the electorate would have liked to change some of its articles—in other words, they would have accepted some changes to the constitutional principles of this Constitution and, more than the principles, to specific articles. I do not think these people can be called [text unclear], because the Constitution was not perfect; no one could present it as [text unclear], nor could anyone present it as the most perfect Constitution. Everyone began the campaign for the Referendum by acknowledging this. Was this the best draft available? This cannot be denied; that was also the international assessment and the assessment of all institutions: that this draft was among the best drafts in Eastern Europe. But when we say “among the drafts,” this means that among them this project was the best that could be drawn up and approved in the interests of [text unclear]; which would be suitable or not, [text unclear], as required within this remit. So this is the message that emerges from the “NO,” and the matters to strengthened in its weak links, the fight against corruption intensified, and much greater flexibility created in the functioning of the administration. And on this occasion, I want to assure these protesters that, however bitter their “NO” vote may be, their message will nevertheless not fall on deaf ears: their message will be taken seriously into account by the Government, Parliament, the President, and the political forces. Third, another segment, another percentage of the “NO” vote, is extremism, both left-wing and right-wing. Extremism is a constant companion of democracy, even of developed democracies. On the left and on the right, extremists have their own ideas; indeed, there are systems of laws based on the far left or the far right. But these extremists have received a definitive and very important response through this “NO,” through this Referendum. What was the response? The definitive response was that the locomotive of Albanian democracy is at the center. Forty-two percent of the Albanian electorate voted for the center, voted for the Constitution, and naturally, if you compare the 42 percent with the camps of the “NO” vote, it is clear that this 42 percent is the locomotive of Albanian Democracy. On the basis of this analysis, and considering a major effort toward the Constitution an absolute necessity, two major objectives emerge: adapting the Reform and further building Democracy. Work is proceeding intensively on these two principles. As I said, I held a meeting with the leaders of the parliamentary parties. We were pleased to note that every one of these parties was concerned about the Constitution. What did I propose to them? That Parliament establish a new constitutional commission to draft a new project, a constitutional draft based on consensus and compromise. Personally, as a key to consensus, I suggest adopting one of their established models [text unclear]—many of them date from the 1950s—regardless of their differences, they have successfully established democratic institutions, institutions proven successful in building a democratic society. In my opinion, what must not be done is to take something from one country and something else from another—for example, take the Parliament from one country, the judiciary from another, and so on. This could create not institutions that interact while remaining independent, but institutions that block one another while remaining independent; this would then create a non-functioning government and lead the country toward unforeseen crises. Adopting one of these models, on the other hand, would, I think, be wise, because those institutions have, as a whole, demonstrated that they build democracy. This is the suggestion I make to the political forces. I hope that, guided by the spirit of consensus, the political forces can agree to offer the Albanian people what they need: one of the forms of government used by their respective countries, which are now members of the EU. I also think and insist that international experts be included in this new commission. It should include our best specialists, as well as international experts from institutions where the most distinguished experts in constitutional law work or collaborate. Another proposal, in the event that in building a democratic society. must not be avoided. It would be absurd for anyone to think that Albania could have a Constitution without a Referendum. There is a rule: the referendum is repeated. To tell the people now that, because they voted “NO,” we will not bring the draft Constitution before them again is unacceptable. The people voted freely, with a clear head, and a verdict is their verdict—the supreme and least contestable one. The people have the right to take up and examine the draft Constitution again. I hope that the political parties, guided by the desire to give the country a Constitution as soon as possible, will reach the necessary consensus and contribute to, and help secure, its approval. On the other hand, I want to emphasize that not only Albanian reality but also the Council of Europe and other institutions are fully aware that there is no legislative vacuum. Albania has constitutional laws which may contain more provisions than a Constitution, but of course they are not a Constitution, because they lack the element of resolving crises, which is a very important element of every Constitution. President Berisha then answered journalists’ questions. Pellumb Bataj: How do you assess the proposal that the new constitutional commission be established not on the basis of the political forces in Parliament, but on the basis of the results of the Referendum? —What changes do you think a new Constitution should contain compared with the one that was not approved on 6 November? ANSWER: I do not think there is consensus among the political forces. You should get the answer to the second question from the constitutional commission. Personally, I have followed very closely the assessments of foreign constitutional experts as well as those of our own specialists. Regarding the form of government, I fully agreed that one of the fifteen models should be chosen; I would vote for any of them. The Constitutional Court had stronger provisions in the Constitution than those reflected in the Draft Constitution. This happened because it was thought that by assigning the responsibility toward the Constitution and human rights to every court, citizens would be better protected. International experts expressed the opposite view: it may seem that rights are better protected, but they may also not be properly protected, because there is no doubt that the most independent legal institution remains the Constitutional Court, especially when it has the legal right to interpret the Constitution. A strong Constitutional Court is an extraordinarily important institution in countries that are building democracy. I would also take into account some remarks by the Council of Europe concerning the Charter of Human Rights, where there are several contradictions that need to be corrected. There may be other issues as well. I prefer to leave it to the commission’s experts to assess these matters. I would not expect substantial changes. The form of government does not constitute a substantial change. All experts have described this Constitution as the constitution of a parliamentary democracy. But there are also other excellent forms that could be taken into consideration. Aleksander Furxhi, “BBC”: There have been strong reactions from the opposition concerning the President’s powers in the Draft Constitution. Do you think the “NO” is directed at you personally or at power at all levels? ANSWER: I do not think [it is directed at] the Constitution. There was no kind of coercion; each individual was free. I am convinced that in another referendum, the figure of 42 will become a larger percentage, because the issue of love for and respect for the Constitution is increasingly an extraordinarily important matter for the future of Democracy. Hamdi Jupe, “Zeri i Popullit”: Mr. President, if consensus among all political forces on the Draft Constitution is not achieved, do you accept the possibility of the early dissolution of Parliament? — Why do you insist on a referendum and not consider the possibility of adopting the Constitution in Parliament? ANSWER: It is inconceivable to turn away from a referendum; I still have faith in the people. Let us take the French nation, for example. You know that Maastricht in France, the founding country of the EU, received a majority of only a few hundred thousand votes, even though both the government and the opposition were calling for its approval. I say that if the French nation had said “NO” to Maastricht, the French political forces would not have said, “We will now approve it in Parliament,” thereby excluding the French nation from having its say. No, they would have gone to another referendum. National referendums are therefore to be repeated; they cannot be avoided. If the political forces fail to reach consensus, as I have said and emphasize again, the option of early elections is an obsession on the part of certain elements who want power as soon as possible or at any cost. But elections will not be considered as long as Parliament is able to approve the legal procedure and the relevant reform. It would therefore be a very grave mistake for political forces to calculate that they can exploit the referendum to go to elections. No, gentlemen. Parliament should continue its work; only if this Parliament loses its majority and is unable to function could such a matter be raised. Instead of trying to exploit the referendum for political ambitions, the political forces would do well to try to give the country a Constitution. Blendi Fejziu, “Aleanca”: How do you view the opposition parties’ proposal for adopting the Constitution through a fast-track to incorporate the observations in a spirit of consensus, using the model I referred to. In any case, a referendum is unavoidable; it must be organized, and doing so would be a goodwill gesture, so that Albania can have a Constitution as soon as possible. Antoneta Malja, Radio Tirana: The vote on the Constitution expressed a degree of dissatisfaction with particular aspects of governance. If you share this view, what do you think should be improved? ANSWER: There is much room for improvement. This applies not only to local government but also to central government, and to all institutions. Therefore, as I said, the protest vote will not fall on deaf ears. It will resonate and will be taken into account. Xhvedet Shehu, “Zeri i Amerikes”: Mr. President, the results of the November 6 referendum have created a new political situation in Albania. Do you see a way out of this situation through consensus or compromise between the two main political forces? ANSWER: In a democracy, participation and coexistence are its rule. The broadest possible consensus must also be achieved. The Constitution is a major nonpartisan issue; it is a national issue. Zamira Koleci, RTSH: Among other things, the people said “NO” more strongly to corruption. But there is also an opinion that corruption is connected with local government. What is your view? ANSWER: There are two realities: corruption exists and must be fought. Unfortunately, it is a companion of countries whose institutions are still being consolidated. But there is also exaggeration on this issue. We should be realistic about it, because psychologically, whenever people are unable to get something done, they think corruption is the main factor. Corruption is actively fought through the consolidation of institutions and the application of laws, which both expose and curb corruption. But is there a need for a deeper, serious and stronger commitment in this regard (Continued on page 2)

Dear Mrs. Rita Sussmuth, It is my pleasure to send you my warmest congratulations and greetings on your election to the high office of President of Parliament. I am convinced that the new mandate entrusted to you will make a great contribution to the further consolidation of a united and prosperous Germany. At the same time, I would like to thank you for your continued support for democratic processes in Albania. I wish you success, Yours sincerely, Eduard Selami