Today at 12:00, at the International Cultural Center in Tirana, the Secretary General of the PDSH, Prof. Dr. Tritan Shehu, and its deputy chairman, Tomor Dosti, will hold a press conference. The press and diplomatic missions in the country are invited to attend. Press and Information Department of the PDSH

Zef Brozi and the Nano case —Brozi had not even read the Nano case file before submitting his request to the Plenum —At the latest Plenum of the Court of Cassation, on 30.06.1995, only two of the 13 requests for protection of legality submitted by Chairman Brozi were accepted To study law, to work within its institutional mechanisms, especially at the top of the justice pyramid, and to preach it in lecture halls or newspaper columns means, among other things, and above all, to be characterized by an inner consistency of principles and conduct in the service of justice. Justice is not a set of masks, taking one off and putting on another. Justice does politics, but in general, it is a political acrobatic act by Mr. Brozi, a Pindaric leap of his, fueled by capricious legality and by a simplistic analysis of the case and the Nano file, so widely discussed and extremely and unjustly politicized by the socialist opposition. The request for protection of legality in the Nano case clearly reveals Mr. Brozi’s ambivalence. Deep down, he himself does not know what he is asking for: a prearranged acquittal. Consequently, in his request for protection of legality, it is not the Chairman of the Court of Cassation who speaks; seated in the chair of his conscience is the lawyer for the accused Nano, P. Sankhaku. The request is self-contradictory. In the final section of his request, Mr. Brozi concludes that “the accused Fatos Nano was charged and convicted of the criminal offense of misappropriating state property in the role of an accomplice.” This conclusion of his contradicts the first section, which mentions the operative part on the basis of which the legal classification of the criminal offense committed by the accused F. Nano was made. Indeed, the district court’s ruling explicitly states: “Having examined all the circumstances of the case described above in their entirety, the judicial panel changes the legal classification set out in the original indictment in this trial, and finds that the accused F. Nno fully committed the criminal offense of misappropriating state property on a large scale, for the benefit of third parties, as provided for by No. 62 of the Criminal Code.” “By examining one by one the elements of the criminal offense charged against the accused F. Nano, and analyzing the events and the relevant evidence, the Tirana Court correctly argued the unlawful activity of the accused Nano and reached the right conclusions regarding his guilt, correctly applying the law to the actions committed. Let us quote from the district court’s ruling a passage from its conclusion concerning the subjective element of the criminal offense: ‘The subjective element is quite evident,’ the ruling states. ‘Taking the events and facts analyzed in this ruling chronologically, and studying in detail the objective aspect of the crime in this particular case, the court reaches the final conclusion that underlying the unlawful omissions and actions committed with direct intent by the accused F. Nano was the aim of obtaining material benefit for Levante - Co and its executive director, Xhuzeppe Perniola. This aim is also clearly apparent, among other things, from the very close ties that the accused had at that time with Xh. Perniola, Hajdin Sejdini, Ben Ali and Ramiz Ali.’ The Chairman of the Court of Cassation has the legal right to submit a request for protection of legality in specific cases, but this request [ends in the source text]. Lectures or newspaper pages, among other things and above all, mean being characterized by an inner consistency of principles and action in the service of justice. Justice is not a kind of measure, a shadow that takes this one and sees that other one. Justice makes politics, but only the politics of the law. Justice kneels and bows only to the law, and not to the pressures of the street or political calculations in cafés or party backrooms. Justice teaches justice, where the enforceability of the law is a sword of Damocles for anyone who violates, abuses, or speculates with the law. And Albanian society, more than any other society, needs precisely lessons in justice. On the other hand, the seat of justice cannot be exploited to settle personal grudges, nor for political careerism. To exploit the temple of justice, as the Chairman of the Court of Cassation, Mr. Brozi, does according to the political noise of the day, even trampling on himself, is, to put it mildly, a case of a crisis of professional and moral identity. It is true, and just as painful, that Chairman Brozi has undergone a strange metamorphosis. We will not deal with violations of the law, unjustified appeals concerning various problems in the transformation of Albanian justice, products of his narrow and personal views on these issues, which he has most speculatively amplified as threats to and endangerment of the independence of the judiciary, etc.; nor will we deal with the relentless campaign of pressure that Mr. Brozi has recently been waging against the democratic government, despite wearing the robe of justice. Let us focus only on his latest statement: the request for protection of legality addressed to the Plenum of the Court of Cassation concerning the criminal case against the defendant F.Nano. Although this request is formulated in the name of the law, in essence it appears to involve violations of the law in the investigation and trial, as Mr. Brozi claims, and it does not pursue purely legal aims. It is more than a legal act: in the context of it is so much distorted and politicized in an extreme and unjust manner in the Nano case clearly expresses Mr. Brozi’s ambivalence. Deep down, even he does not know what he is asking for: the acquittal of the defendant Nano—that is, dismissal of the criminal case—or sending the case for retrial to the Tirana Court of First Instance. But Mr. Brozi, as chief judge, should know that dismissal of a case and a retrial are two opposite concepts, and asking for them simultaneously first of all shows the political bias of his request and the blatant prejudgment of the case; secondly, it shows that Chief Judge Brozi has not properly studied and analyzed the Nano case—in other words, he does not know it in its entirety. This request displays a marked lack of legal objectivity, logical and legal contradictions, and a distortion of the content of the judgment of the Tirana Court of First Instance, No. 266, dated 3.04.1994, upheld by Judgment No. 174, dated 26.05.1994 of the Court of Appeal and by Judgment No. 21, dated 28.07.1994 of the Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation. It must be said that the judgment of the Tirana Court of First Instance is fully based on evidence and reasoned in law, the result of in-depth analysis, professional competence, maturity, and seriousness on the part of the panel of judges. The criminal offense charged against the defendant F.Nano has been analyzed in all its constituent elements: object, objective aspect, subject, and subjective aspect. Mr. Brozi’s claim in his request that “not only was the object of the criminal offense (damage to state interests) not correctly determined, but the court of first instance and the higher courts did not analyze the other elements of the criminal offense, the subjective and objective aspects of the criminal offense,” is ridiculous and shows that Mr. Brozi truly has not studied Nano’s file at all. Moreover, he disregards the judgment of the Tirana Court, upheld by the higher levels of justice, because everything in his mind is so extensively distorted justice, because everything in his mind is of the criminal offense, by abusing his procedural position and the rights reserved by law to the Chairman of the Court of Cassation, are evidence of Zef Brozi’s professional deterioration, which unfortunately lowers confidence in him almost to zero. Indeed, this is not the first time that Chairman Brozi has misused and exploited his legal and procedural rights. Let us recall the unlawful release of the Greek citizen defendant, Kallafatos, a case now in the public domain. Its outcome should have made Mr. Brozi take a hard look at himself, rather than, paradoxically, celebrate it as his own victory, gathering journalists in the middle of the night who served his alibi. But Chief Judge Brozi deceives himself when he thinks that politicization and the political shelter of a newspaper and part of public opinion are a shield for his reasoning and positions as a jurist who kneels before the political noise of the day. The abuse of legal rights, misconduct, and politicization in his working practice seriously compromise Chairman Brozi’s legal conscience. Poses as an angel of justice do not suit a jurist of his kind. We may recall that, at the last Plenum of the Court of Cassation, on 30.6.1995, of the 13 requests for protection of legality made by Chairman Brozi, only two were accepted. A similarly unfavorable ratio was seen at the previous Plenum. Is not even this simple statistical ratio enough to show the “objectivity” of Chairman Brozi’s requests for protection of legality? There are two ways to explain this marked lack of legal objectivity: either Chairman Brozi does not study and analyze the cases submitted to him thoroughly enough, in which case this is a lack of professional commitment, or Mr. Zef is influenced by non-legal considerations and exploits in the most specious way the procedural position and rights reserved to him by law as Chairman of the Court of Cassation. The Chairman of the Court of Cassation—these confidence in him by law as Chairman of the Court of Cassation. Spokesperson for the Ministry of Justice AGIM NEZA

Statement by the Ministry of Justice on the findings of the inspection conducted at the Enforcement Office of the Tirana District Pursuant to Article 1, letter b, of Law No. 7381, dated 9.05.1990, “On the Establishment of the Ministry of Justice,” inspectors from this Ministry conducted an inspection at the Enforcement Office of the Tirana District from 11 to 14.07.1995, prompted by concerns arising from delays in the adjudication of cases and, subsequently, in the enforcement of judicial decisions. The Minister of Justice, Hektor Frasheri, and the Deputy Minister, Vladimir Kristo, took part in the review of the findings of the inspection with judges and enforcement officers of the Tirana District. The inspection specifically concerned compliance with the legal provisions governing this issue. The actions of the Enforcement Office were inspected in 370 cases, representing approximately 50% of the judicial decisions held by this office. In approximately 37% of the cases inspected, enforcement proceedings had been suspended; of these, 70%, or 95 cases, had been suspended by the Chairman of the Court of Cassation, and the remainder (45 cases) by judges of the Tirana District. An analysis of these irregularities revealed that the Tirana Enforcement Office bears responsibility for violations of the law at the judgment-enforcement stage, which have diminished the authority of the judiciary and caused endless delays and runarounds for citizens, institutions, and various companies in connection with the decisions. The Chairman of the Court of Cassation issued an order suspending enforcement, which was then cancelled again on 31.10.1994 by letter No. N/P-133. These suspensions delay enforcement of the judicial decision by 13 months. Article 185 of the Code of Civil Procedure states that orders must be issued by name. This authority belongs to the Chairman of the Court of Cassation and the Prosecutor General. Only orders issued directly by the persons mentioned above oblige the Enforcement Office to suspend enforcement of judicial decisions. Unlawfully, the Enforcement Office has also ordered the suspension of enforcement of decisions on the basis of letters received bearing the seal of the Court of Cassation which, although carrying the Chairman’s name, were signed by unidentified persons. In these cases, the Enforcement Office should not have suspended enforcement. Another improper practice was criticized: the Enforcement Office’s acceptance of suspension orders hand-delivered by interested citizens outside official channels, which led to the presentation of forged orders and, consequently, the wrongful suspension of enforcement of judicial decisions. Cases in which suspension had been ordered were also criticized…

Inside Dibër We support the appeal of the Association of the Persecuted of Kurbin The opposition of the Albanian army

PAGE 5

The decision to erect the April 2 memorial in Shkoder and the “Democratic Movement” memorial in Kavaje is approved At yesterday’s meeting of the Council of Ministers, draft laws were reviewed: on ratifying the loan agreement with the Kuwaiti Fund for Arab Economic Development for the amount of USD 10 million, concerning support for the irrigation rehabilitation project, and on ratifying the treaty with the Government of the United States of America, concerning the reciprocal encouragement and protection of investments. On the proposal of the Ministry of Health and Environmental Protection, a decision was approved permitting work in health institutions beyond normal working hours, up to 240 hours per year, in cases of extraordinary epidemiological situations. On the basis of the proposal of the Ministry of (Continued on page 2)

Yesterday, meetings were held by 4 standing parliamentary committees of the People’s Assembly. The Law Committee discussed the decree of the President of the Republic, Sali Berisha, on defining the territorial boundaries of the jurisdiction of military courts. The draft law on the Armed Forces in the Republic of Albania was also reviewed, as was an addition to Law No. 7905, dated 21.5.1995, on the Code of Criminal Procedure. Meanwhile, in the committee of

The main charge against him is abuse of office, but the deputy prosecutor adds that the criminal offense of theft may also be involved It has been reported that the Vlore Prosecutor’s Office has ordered house arrest for the chairman of the socialist commune of the town of Selenice and former constituent village of it, Qatip Basha. The report by the regional State Audit Service office in Vlore has become the basis for the case; on it, the deputy prosecutor of Vlore, Ilmica, issued an order in these July days against the chairman of the commune of Selenice, accusing him of abuse of office, which resulted in his being confined to his home under guard. For RD, the deputy prosecutor of Vlore explains: “The chairman of the commune of Selenice is accused of the criminal offense of abuse of office. There are several actions to analyze and clarify, but we may also be dealing with the criminal offense of theft. “The investigation into the case against the chairman of the socialist commune of Selenice has begun, while his file is in the deputy prosecutor’s office. Abuse of office gravely compromises the socialist chairman, especially since he is the ‘primo’ of the town of Selenice and the villages that make up the commune. The team of experts will establish the facts, determining the damage caused to the state as a result of actions contrary to the law. Once completed, the file will be dealt with legally by the district court. Asked why the prosecutor’s office was forced to change the security measure, the deputy prosecutor of Vlore replies that the measure was changed by placing the chairman of the commune of Selenice under house arrest, because he is suspected of possibly having committed the criminal offense of theft.” Four months ago, the powerful “indicator,” the State Audit Service, sounded the alarm. Its “observation” of the commune of Selenice, which is run by the Socialists, uncovered unlawful actions committed by the socialist chairman as head of the socialist commune. In accordance with the law, the State Audit Service filed a complaint with the prosecutor’s office, seeking criminal prosecution for the offense committed. In these days of July, the Prosecutor’s Office began examining the file of the socialist chairman of the commune of Selenice. The complaint filed by the State Audit Service in April took four months before the Albanian justice system acted. As can be seen, after Nano, other small socialist fish have stirred up the waters of corruption. Justice will have its say, upholding the principle that “everyone gets what they deserve.”

PAGE 2