LONDON Albanian President Sali Berisha cancelled the press conference he was expected to give on Wednesday, at the end of his three-day visit to England, the BBC reported yesterday. The radio station said that the press conference “was cancelled because there was no interest.” This was apparently President Berisha’s latest “incident” with the press during his visit to Britain. First, Berisha was forced to promise that he would reconsider the matter of renewing the contract with the BBC, after Prime Minister Major insisted that he do so. Second, Berisha refused to give an interview to the BBC’s Albanian-language service, as the latter reported on 29 March. Third, in an interview with the BBC World Service in English, the Albanian president called the imprisonment and sentencing of journalists Aleksandër Frangaj and Martin Leka of the newspaper “Koha Jonë” normal. The cancellation of the press conference in London for “lack of interest from journalists” apparently reflects Berisha’s relations with the press not only in Albania, but abroad as well. Correspondent of “Zëri i popullit.”

— As clear evidence of this, he presented public statements by President Berisha and Prime Minister Meksi, in which the opposition is branded as the enemy — Yesterday at the Tirana court: The defense completely demolishes the prosecution’s case and proves the political fabrication of the trial REPORT FROM THE DEFENSE HEARING — After 13 days of trial, the final act on Sunday, 3 April: the court’s announcement of its verdict — Logic, convincing arguments, incontrovertible facts and innocence. These words could sum up yesterday’s hearing in the criminal case against the Chairman of the Socialist Party and member of the People’s Assembly—the only European parliamentarian who has been in prison for eight months—Fatos Nano; former Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Sokrat Plaka; former Secretary General of the Ministry of Internal Trade Robert Gjoni; and former department director in that ministry Hasan Halko. Together with their lawyers, they once again demonstrated that their arrest, investigation and trial have no basis in law, because they are unsupported by concrete facts proving the commission of the criminal offense of which they are accused. After the hearing was opened by Chairman Bendo, in the presence of the court, the secretaries and the parties present, the proceedings continued with the examination of the criminal offense of which they are accused. Sokrat Plaka addressed the court and first read an opening statement, in which he said that the prosecutor’s claim, with his request that I be sentenced to five years’ deprivation of liberty, has not only outraged me but has astonished all reasonable people and raised serious doubts and questions among them. Mr. Plaka stressed that, for everyone, the trial had fully demonstrated my innocence, and everyone had expected justice and my immediate release. (Continued on page 3) The trial you conducted in and to falsify official documents, acts defined as crimes under Articles 62 and 110 of the Criminal Code, was not sufficient grounds for conviction. This trial, riddled with serious violations of procedural rules, was nothing other than a continuation of the violations of the law committed by the prosecution, which I brought to your attention before the trial began, in the hope that the court, as an independent body and the sole institution responsible for administering justice, would act according to the law to remedy and prevent violations of the law. But the opposite happened. The procedural and criminal violations committed by the prosecution were compounded by violations committed by you. I will briefly point out once again to you the serious violations by the prosecution, which I am setting out comprehensively to draw your attention to them, since they are so grave that the proceedings you conducted can in no way be called a trial of a criminal case; it must have no legal consequence. The case was brought to trial by the prosecution, which on 14.2.1994 changed the charge against Fatos Nano from abuse of office and falsification of official documents, offenses under Articles 106 and 110 of the Criminal Code, to misappropriation of state property, an offense under Articles 82 and 110 of the Criminal Code. We asked the prosecutor to explain what constituted the elements of the offense of misappropriation, but he not only failed to clarify that absurd decision, riddled with contradictions; without carrying out any investigative action and without grounds for further investigation, he declared the investigation concluded. As we pointed out at the beginning of the trial, the investigation was concluded—and, had we been able to study the case materials—in violation of Article 102 of the Criminal Procedure Code, because during the investigation we were able to examine only 50 pages of the file, which comprises 24 volumes. Even you as the court could not have had the opportunity to examine it in its entirety, and thus could have reached a conclusion in the case without knowing the materials. Since we had not examined the materials, the case could have been concluded without our forming any conviction about that absurd decision, riddled with contradictions. Likewise, since we were unfamiliar with the contents of the case and the investigations, we could not carry out the necessary actions [partly illegible]. [...]

Fatos Nano’s statement in court Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen prosecutors and judges, ...your training or qualifications acquired over several weeks or several months in Rome, Paris, etc.). ...are we being lied to? The matter is much more seri— As Mr. Sanxhaku argued with great competence, even though he had only a few hours to familiarize himself with the case, the accusation is not supported by arguments or evi-

Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen prosecutors and judges, this is not my final statement. Mr. Chairman, Ladies and gentlemen prosecutors and judges, This is not my final statement. Until the truths of the transition in Albania are finally brought to light, many things will have to be stated, investigated and judged. Among them is this fabricated trial, which remains an open wound, one of the cultural manifestations of the present regime’s political crime against the citizen and against the rule of law. As has become widely known, the authorities you represent—the State Control Service, the Prosecution and the Court—did not allow me, the of the People’s Assembly, former prime minister of Albania’s first post-communist transition government, to take part in the case fabricated against me. This began with the obstruction and manipulation of documents of the Nano Government by the State Control Service and the prosecution during the parliamentary discussion of the case, and continued with my imprisonment and exclusion from the investigation and examination, which were conducted one-sidedly, with my being kept from confronting witnesses, and finally with the denial of my [legal rights] in the trial you have conducted over 13 days of hearings up to today. Therefore, I reiterate that, by never for a moment becoming an accomplice to violations of the law or to the political crime of your authorities, my interventions in this matter, including today, have been and remain remedial, denunciatory and preventive, so that as few people as possible like you become implicated in the abuse of power and the rights of the newly accused through actions aimed at silencing the political opposition by the party in power—a crime in which you, too, have become involved by accepting its violation of the independence of the organs of justice. Despite my efforts and legal notices, ladies and gentlemen prosecutors and judges, you have accepted and submitted to this politically directed trial and to procedural actions that I have denounced before you in part. Thus, it is being directed by Sali Berisha, Kolec Topalli, Bashkim Gjilade, Agron Musaraj, Eduard Selami, Bleri Çela, etc., unlawfully and through Mafia-style actions. By this I do not mean only their duties and their direct and indirect actions to release [partly illegible] ... [damaged portion of column]. [Above the headline, cut-off fragment] ... formal decision, as the law provides, to reject the preliminary investigation was also supported by the hearing prosecutor, Mr. G. Gjukaj, who stated that the time allowed for the defendant and lawyers to examine the case materials had been sufficient. I do not know what he means by sufficient time when, as mentioned a little earlier, the case materials and the [document?] concerning the conclusion of the investigation were dated the same day, namely 15.2.1994. It seems that Mr. Genc considers this time sufficient for his own actions, since what matters to him is not the court’s [unclear], but only defending the indictment drawn up and approved by his prosecutors. The accused, however, must necessarily be made aware of the collected materials in order to prepare a defense against the accusations, whether justified or unjustified. Failure to provide the conditions for examining the materials deprives the accused of the opportunity to express opinions or challenge evidence obtained unlawfully, or evidence that may have been fabricated, manipulated and, why not, falsified. During the preliminary investigation, on 12.1.1994, it was decided that an accounting examination of the case would be carried out. We had requested this examination as far back as 6.8.1993 and repeatedly thereafter, but in carrying it out the legal requirements guaranteeing the accused the right to put matters to the expert, ask supplementary questions, etc., were not observed. Worse still, examination of the case materials at the court hearing showed that other expert examinations had also been conducted, of which neither the accused nor we as lawyers had been informed at all. Likewise, from the file admitted in court, we learn that many translations were made from Italian into Albanian; [unclear] the translators, was a decision made appointing them, were they sworn in for the accused, were the translators interested in the case, were questions asked to compare [them?] with the original, since the translations were then made for the first file, were they made from a copy of the original, how does she know that [partly illegible].

[Continuation of damaged fragment] ... formal decision, as the law provides, to reject illegible]. case, the accusation is not supported by arguments or legal evidence, or by experts, even in the file submitted by the prosecution. So what remains? What remains is the serious conceptual, legal and accounting discrepancy between the claims and reality; between the Qorri examination (Telegrafi - Shkrel[?]li) and the legal expert opinion of the Italian [professionals?]; and the flagrant contradiction between Blerim Çela’s inspection report and the official “Carte Dei Conti” document confirming the full arrival in Albania of the Italian emergency aid, amounting to 20 billion lire. These “contradictions” between the accusation and reality, gentlemen of the court, do not allow you to resolve [them] under today’s state leadership; therefore, I do not ask you to do what you are not free to do. They will remain unresolved as long as the “Nano” case remains politically prejudged and a key element in a political scheme that appears anti-communist but is essentially global in geopolitical nature, aimed at keeping Albania far from or outside European institutions. I say “apparently anti-communist” because, Mr. Chairman, this is the greatest paradox of this trial. Can anyone be convinced by any verdict you may deliver, one arising from the communist mentality of judges and officials who were formerly communists, taking orders from the highest former-communist party, and using still-communist codes to condemn the “enemy group” and Italian agency—the former communist... in Albania? Unless everyone, starting with the state, has their brains washed clean, these matters will not be put right, and in Albania “enemy groups” will continue to be accused, particularly those from the opposition. But the damage is far greater than this scandalous distortion of the rule of law. Is this entire trial not the most primitive and barbaric way to express the government’s goodwill and partnership toward the Italian state, this developed European neighbor, in return for the generous support and assistance it has given the Albanian people? If not, do the statements by President Berisha in the interview he gave to MEP Jash Gavronski on 24.2.1994, that is, 10 days before the trial began, not express a state political paranoia: “At the interstate level, we cannot be (that is, the President of the Republic?) generous in compensation[?]... since Kërkal accepted a certificate of honor from our enemies and the Italian embassy in Albania was turned into a section of the Albanian Communist Party” (?) Gentlemen! I denounced this political anti-propaganda paranoia of the present authorities before, and I denounce it again today, because the membership card of the SPA ... [text cut off at the end] (Continued on page 3).

The trial you conducted into the criminal case against Mr. Fatos Nano, as Chairman of the Socialist Party of Albania and a member of parliament, as well as a former prime minister accused of helping other persons to appropriate state property on a large scale... ... in a one-sided and arbitrary manner, without issuing even a formal decision, as the law provides, to dismiss our claims. Moreover, the unlawful conduct of the prosecution during the preliminary investigation was supported by the prosecutor at the hearing, Mr. G. Gjonkaj, who said that there had been sufficient time to examine the materials...