Interview with the village head, about brotherhood and coexistence in the Kolonja area [?] If it is not accepted today that knowledge of human rights should be introduced as a subject in our secondary schools and universities, then we have neglected an essential educational task. This means that we are still far from a clear understanding of democracy as a way of life and as a civic culture. In this sense, relations between people within a village or an area cannot be seen as separate from the overall political climate. The village head states that the residents have always lived in harmony, respecting one another and the traditions of the place. According to him, even after the elections, despite the debates and political divisions, no one has the right to undermine coexistence or turn politics into a reason for division. He emphasizes that the majority in the area voted for the Socialists, and this is a reality that must be accepted normally, without prejudice and without revenge. He further adds that people here need work, roads, water, and concrete support for agriculture, not party quarrels. Politics, he says, must serve to unite and solve the community’s problems. If anyone tries to import a spirit of conflict, this does not match the tradition of the area or the interests of the village. Therefore, according to him, brotherhood and respect must be preserved, because people will continue to live together after every campaign and every election.

Another provocation by the Macedonian authorities against the Albanian state Albanians need not only the commitment of cultural and political associations, but also the support of the mother state. Recent reactions denounce the behavior and statements of the Macedonian authorities, which are described as provocative toward the Albanian state and toward the rights of Albanians there. It is said that any attempt to minimize the presence of Albanians or deny them their basic rights is unacceptable. The text points out that silence in the face of these acts would be harmful and that Albanian institutions are being called upon to take a clear position. It is also emphasized that relations between the two countries cannot be built on pressure, discrimination, or political insults. The Macedonian authorities are accused of unnecessarily heightening tensions through their behavior and creating needless obstacles in interstate relations. At the end, there is a call for a more forceful diplomatic response and greater national solidarity with Albanians across the border.

Meksi minister of the Meksi government [?] Uka, once again for the non-recognition of BELORTA, for the terrorizing of doctors before depoliticization [?] Yesterday at 10 in the morning the plenary session began, with interpellations with the ministers at its center. Various deputies requested explanations on issues related to the army, the administration of defense, as well as the problems of agriculture and the market for produce. The debate was characterized by critical tones and numerous exchanges. In the part related to agriculture, the difficulties of producers, the lack of market guidance, and collection problems were mentioned. BELORTA was also mentioned, in a critical context concerning the non-recognition or malfunctioning of mechanisms that would help farmers. In another part of the debate there were questions for the Minister of Defense regarding administration and the situation in the relevant institutions. At the end, it was noted that the opposition and the majority took different positions on the way the issues were handled, but the interpellations served to bring the day’s most pressing problems to attention.

THE JUDICIARY Witnesses do not appear, statements given before investigators are read out... The court process has continued amid tension and the absence of some witnesses, which has led to their earlier statements given before investigators being read out in the hearing. The defense has raised questions about the procedural validity of this practice, while the court has decided to continue the proceedings. There have been debates in the courtroom about the way evidence is taken and about the rights of the parties. The reading of the earlier statements has been presented as a solution imposed by the witnesses’ failure to appear. The defense has requested that the process respect legal standards and that every piece of evidence be examined carefully. The article conveys the charged atmosphere of the hearing and the expectation that the process will continue in the coming days.

How much was the Italian emergency aid allocated to Albania in 1991? 20 billion, 23 billion, or 30 billion? How much was the Italian emergency aid allocated to Albania in 1991? 20 billion, 23 billion, or 30 billion? Our newspaper keeps in its archive a copy of the agreement between the Italian government and the Albanian government concerning the aid granted at that time. It will be made public to readers with facsimiles and explanatory comments, in order to clarify one of the most debated issues of recent years. The different figures that have been circulated have caused confusion and fueled political polemics. The article raises the question of whether the aid was 20 billion, 23 billion, or 30 billion, and calls for full transparency regarding the official documents. The editorial team emphasizes that the public has the right to know the truth and to see the original document, without intermediaries and without one-sided interpretations. According to the announcement, the material will be published in full and accompanied by explanations for each figure mentioned in the public debate. Readers are thus invited to judge for themselves on the basis of the documents.

Rexhep Uka, Minister of Agriculture, for the first time threw mud at his colleagues Today, at the meeting of yesterday’s interpellation, Rexhep Uka defended an inappropriate stance toward some of his colleagues, using polemical tones that do not help clarify the problems. The editorial team notes that a minister, especially the Minister of Agriculture, should provide serious answers to the issues that concern the country, not engage in broad accusations. The note states that parliamentary debate must be the place for arguments and institutional responsibility. Throwing mud at colleagues or opponents does not improve the situation in agriculture, nor does it serve the public interest. Therefore, according to the editorial team, more political restraint and less offensive rhetoric are needed.

Meeting Agricultural Youth Forum