Exactly! The most popular and most accurate expression used is: “Constituent Assembly.” In fact, it is such by the name assigned to it, but not by its content. In this sense it is just as deceptive as the name “operating room” for a room understood only in the sense of a room where operations are performed. In our case, the “Constituent Assembly” is such because it has been given a pompous name; likewise, the “presidential decree” is such from its formal appearance, but not from its content. According to the official voice of the presidency’s legal department, this decree will regulate the way the Constituent Assembly functions. This assessment would be acceptable only if the decree had been drafted in accordance with the spirit of political pluralism and with the need for the new constitution to be the work of broad national consensus. But as soon as you read its provisions, you become convinced that we are dealing not with an act that aims to build bridges of understanding among political and social forces, but with an instrument that legalizes pronounced inequalities and unjustifiable privileges. Now even those who prepared it say so! That is precisely where the cynicism begins. If the Assembly were truly representative of the broad will of the people, then there would be no need for evasive wording, for shortening deadlines, for the open exclusion of the opposition and of differing opinions. This is why this decree smells of grossness, because it sees political life as one-sided property; it smells of cynicism, because it speaks in the name of democracy while restricting democracy; it smells of hypocrisy, because it calls for cooperation while at the same time setting up barriers. In cases where the constitution is presented as a great social contract, procedure matters just as much as content. If the procedure is distorted, the result remains incomplete as well. With this logic, every attempt to dress up one-sidedness in the garb of reconciliation is doomed to produce distrust. And distrust, as is known, is the worst foundation for a foundational act such as a constitution. This is not a matter of terms or labels. It is a matter of state seriousness. Albania’s constitution cannot be drafted like a party regulation, nor like a document serving the narrow interest of the day. It must belong to everyone. Therefore any decree that goes in the opposite direction must be politically and morally denounced. (Continues on page 4)