- Mihail Gorbaçovi will also take part in the Conference - On 8 March 1994, Josep Palau, peace coordinator of the Commission of the Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly, sent Fatos Nano an invitation to participate in the international conference that will discuss the topic: «National conflicts in Europe. A peace strategy for civilized societies». The conference will take place from 12 to 15 May 1994 in Spain. Many political figures have been invited to the conference and have confirmed their attendance, including Mihail Gorbaçovi and Filipe Gonzales. «We know that Fatos Nano is in prison,» Josep Palau declared that day, «but we consider it an honor to invite him to the conference. Even if he is in prison, he will continue to speak.» NATIONAL LIBRARY TIRANË

WITNESSES FULLY CONFIRM THAT NONE OF THE CHARGES AGAINST FATOS NANO HOLDS UP - The people ask: Why is the trial not being broadcast on RTV? RTVSH’s silence itself answers this question and clearly shows the baselessness of the charges - SUMMARY OF THE HEARINGS HELD Eight days of the trial in the Nano case have passed. Eight days of tireless, uninterrupted work to meet the assignments ahead of schedule and honor commitments. And still, nothing. Fifty-one witnesses have testified before the court, answering in a truncated manner the questions of the prosecutors, the defendants and their lawyers (with the exception of Fatos Nano and his lawyers), and still, nothing. The farce concocted at the Prosecutor’s Office and served up in the courtroom has failed. Not a single fact, document or piece of evidence has been presented against Fatos Nano. And nothing against the other defendants either, who are packed in there merely as decoration. Nothing, nothing, nothing! On 18 March at 9 o’clock, documentary evidence will be submitted. At the close of the hearings for questioning witnesses, Sokrat Plaka’s lawyer, Mr Ali Meta, submitted a request to the court for Xhani de Mikelis, former Italian foreign minister; Enriko de Matas; Torkuato Kardili, former Italian ambassador to Albania; Xhuzepë Perjolës, executive president of the firm «Levante CO»; Rajmondo Çeli; and Alfa Muras to be called as witnesses. Since it is impossible to bring them here, lawyer Meta continued, we request that their testimonies be read. He also requested that representatives of the political parties on the Citizens’ Commission, established by government decision to oversee and administer aid, be called as witnesses. Among them [text continues beyond the edge of the photograph] … Robert Gjini’s [unclear] and his lawyer, Mr Roland Përmeti, to call as witnesses Agron Klosin, Fejzo Mezzinin, Perikli Konomin, Jorgo Popollën and Tefik Konçin. The latter is an employee of the State Audit Service who took the file containing Robert Gjini’s personal documents and never returned it. The court has completed one stage of its work: the confrontation with the witnesses. Hearings to call the experts and submit the documentary records are now expected. So far, everything prepared by the prosecution has fallen apart, even though work was done extended hours, including on Bajram day. Let us wait and see what comes next. Catholic Easter is ahead of us, followed by Orthodox Easter? Will the trial be over by then? And most importantly, will Fatos Nano obtain justice? [text continues beyond the edge of the photograph] resumption of the trial

An information cable transmits the trial from the courtroom to a room on the second floor In keeping with my already clearly established, unwavering position, I ask that the following be entered into the minutes: - First, allow me to greet Mr Dervishi on the second floor (this refers to prosecutor Fatos Dervishi on the second floor of the building where the trial is being held), because, in violation of his duty and the ruling, he withdraws in accordance with the law, the mass media [text continues beyond the edge of the photograph] … Mr Chairman, I submit that your point of reference must be the ruling, and not the pressure the highest levels of power are exerting on me (whether concerning the present or the accusation, voluntarily or involuntarily), because this people is tired of political blackmail against the judicial authorities. More specifically, Mr Qeleshi should know that the people, including me, know how many dollars the road from [text continues beyond the edge of the photograph] costs.

Gëllip Toto: «I had nothing to do with the aid; as far as I know, I heard about it from Edi Vesho» Why does the prosecution need witnesses like these? Witness Toto, (head of the [unclear] branch of Albkoop), stated from the outset that he had not dealt with the aid and testified using Edi Vesho’s account. In response to the prosecution’s questions about prices, the composition of the goods, etc., he answered each one with the phrase: «I don’t know because I wasn’t involved with the aid, but from what I’ve heard from E. Vesho, the differences that emerge will not be paid to Levanto Co on the final invoices.» The only thing witness Toto knew was that the Minister of Internal Trade dealt with the aid. The prosecution did not answer lawyer Brahaj’s question: «Why are you bringing witnesses like these who don’t know anything?» It did not answer at all, because otherwise it would have had to say: «Just to fill the numbers.» Nimet Angoni: «The aid was distributed properly» This witness (a former member of the Citizens’ Commission), through his testimony, confirmed that «the Commission in question distributed the aid properly». There were no discrepancies in the unloading of the aid brought by the Palladio ferry. After further explaining the aid-distribution procedure, he stated that Aleko Lipe (former chairman of the Citizens’ Commission) had also brought the high prices to A. Grafin’s attention. In response to prosecutor Qeleshi’s interesting question about how much the aid had helped to alleviate hunger, witness Angoni gave an answer that did not satisfy the prosecution at all, which had been waiting for Nano’s deeds to be attacked. Çirimi Zhurda: «I had nothing to do with the aid» Are witnesses like these lawful? As deputy director of Albkontroll, Ç. Zhurda stated that he had not dealt with the aid, but pointed out that Albkontroll was responsible for checking quantities, not quality. The deputy director did not know that his enterprise had also conducted quality checks on the aid. Nevertheless, the prosecution presented this witness on account of his enterprise’s particular authority to carry out quantitative checks, and because it had performed its duty with regard to the aid, etc. Although this first witness was generally unfamiliar with the aid, his testimony left prosecutors and B. Çela at a loss for words; they had repeatedly claimed that no checks had been carried out on the aid. When a lawyer remarked that «when a witness has no knowledge of the matter, calling him as a witness is unlawful», Mr Bendo took responsibility for it himself, invoking his authority. When former Prime Minister Nano is also accused over shortcomings in the work of the port warehousemen, Aleksandër Lipe answers: «I was not a warehouseman, but the chairman of the Citizens’ Commission» That was this witness’s answer to a lawyer’s question, declaring [unclear] that inspecting warehouse documents and processing goods at the Albanian port was not within the remit of this Citizens’ Commission. A. Lipe again explained the Commission’s working procedures and the distribution of donor aid; the issue of prices has also been attributed to the Italian side and to me, but more-[?] ...certainly by Gavrosh Pogaçe. Although this witness was not [unclear] in full, the prosecution did not like the Commission’s authority over the aid, nor the authorized connection whereby it used the Council of Ministers’ instructions for all the requests and orders it issued. (Continued on page 3)

Mr Chairman, I cannot fail to remind you of the excellent progress you are making in your career as a prosecutor in this trial. I also remind you that two sides are competing for this favored position under today’s authorities in this trial: you, who are very much in tune with the prosecution, and me, who am here to denounce that the only person missing from this trial is the chairman of the court. With my modest knowledge, it seems to me that this type of tape recorder (he picks up a tape recorder from the table and shows it to the court) is used by the National Intelligence Service. I know this well, because «the house with leaves» is opposite the window of my office. This shows that this trial is being conducted here and documented in this way. What file is SHIK working on? Think about it: perhaps it is opening your file. Thank you. Statement made before the court during one of the hearings on 15 March 1994

WE HIGHLIGHT: «I will not let you treat me the way they treat you at the High Council of Justice» That is how Fatos Nano replied when [unclear] in court. Agim Bendo then drew his attention to the fact that, at another hearing, he had said: «I get along with my lawyers as well as you get along with the Chairman of the High Council of Justice.»

TOMORROW YOU WILL READ: «I HAVE CUT OFF RELATIONS WITH THE COURT, BUT NOT WITH THE FLOWERS...» An interview with Socialist Party Chairman Fatos Nano, given to our newspaper in the courtroom

Judging by your interventions up to this stage of the proceedings, my conviction has been strengthened that your opinion is prejudiced, in accordance with the instructions received at Villa No. 4. You are carrying out very obediently—and for that I congratulate you—the guidance you received at the place where you summoned yourselves? - “What should we accuse him of?” you received the answer. - “More, sir, more, sir! We have no answer, all the aid. There, that’s who we should accuse!...” [The text begins with an unclear, possibly corrupted phrase:] prosecutor, I ask that the following be examined and entered in the minutes: - First, allow me to greet Mr. Dervishi on this second floor (the reference is building where the trial is being held), because, contrary to your duty and to the decision required by law, you are allowing the mass media to misinform public opinion about the truth emerging from the witnesses’ statements and from the confrontations in this trial. Since, as I have said, a significant part of the judgments made during this trial are connected with a misunderstanding of relations involving aid from the West, if this disinformation of public opinion by the state mass media, especially RTV, were due to such a misunderstanding, you could use your legal expertise to ensure that it did not happen again. But apparently, this is being done deliberately. If we are truly sure of what you are doing, give the public the cable you sent to Fatos Dervishi on the second floor, so that they too can judge. - Second, I am obliged to remind you that Nano’s lawyer is responsible for all your decisions or those of the prosecution, whether intentional or unintentional, because this people is tired of political pressure being exerted on the judicial authorities. More specifically, Mr. Qeleshiu should know that the people—including me—know how many dollars the road from Florirona to Çërravë costs. The people, among whom I again include myself, also know something that perhaps even you, Mr. Gjokutaj, have not heard: the recording equipment at Villa No. 4 has been put back into operation. - Third, inform the public about this as well, in order to bring out what you dispute—not in every instance—that, to tell the truth, Mr. Nano does not have accurate information. I repeat all this so that you and everyone else clearly keep in mind the other fundamental reasons, apart from violations of the law, that have compelled me to adopt this procedural stance toward your panel of judges, and to remind you respectfully (Continued on page 4)