Albania by Gledis Gjipali
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Albania by Gledis Gjipali Capital: Tirana Population: 3.1 million GNI/capita, PPP: US$8,640 Source: !e data above was provided by !e World Bank, World Development Indicators 2011. Nations in Transit Ratings and Averaged Scores 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Electoral Process 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.50 4.00 4.00 3.75 3.75 4.00 Civil Society 3.75 3.75 3.50 3.25 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 Independent Media 4.00 4.00 3.75 4.00 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 4.00 4.00 Governance* 4.25 4.25 4.25 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a National Democratic 4.75 Governance n/a n/a n/a 4.25 4.00 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.50 Local Democratic 3.25 Governance n/a n/a n/a 3.25 2.75 2.75 2.75 2.75 3.00 Judicial Framework 4.25 and Independence 4.50 4.25 4.25 4.50 4.25 4.00 4.00 4.25 4.25 Corruption 5.25 5.00 5.25 5.25 5.25 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 Democracy Score 4.25 4.17 4.13 4.04 3.79 3.82 3.82 3.82 3.93 4.04 * Starting with the 2005 edition, Freedom House introduced separate analysis and ratings for national democratic governance and local democratic governance to provide readers with more detailed and nuanced analysis of these two important subjects. NOTE: !e ratings reflect the consensus of Freedom House, its academic advisers, and the author(s) of this report. !e opinions expressed in this report are those of the author(s). !e ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. !e Democracy Score is an average of ratings for the categories tracked in a given year. 50 Nations in Transit 2011 E S he most significant governance-related event in Albania in 2010 was the opinion issued by the European Commission (EC) on the country’s application for European Union (EU) membership. !e opinion noted TAlbania’s stalled reforms and especially the lack of progress on political criteria, including: the stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights, and respect for and protection of minorities. !us, the EC concluded that candidate status and the opening of membership negotiations could not yet be granted to Albania until several key priorities were met. !e country’s shortcomings in implementing transformation and democratization reforms were coupled with an ongoing political crisis involving an investigation of the disputed June 2009 parliamentary elections; this had a significant bearing on the EC’s opinion, as it was at the top of the agenda and a constant concern for EU representatives in their relations with Albania during the year. At the end of 2010, Albania was invited to join the EU’s visa-free travel zone. Being in substance a technical process as well as the only issue that retained cross-party political support, the lifting of visa requirements on November 8 was a much anticipated achievement in public opinion, and one in which the Albanian government had invested great effort, under growing public pressure. National Democratic Governance. Albania’s political and governance climate throughout 2010 was marked by harsh disputes between the government—led by Prime Minister Sali Berisha of the Democratic Party of Albania (PD)—and the main opposition Socialist Party (SP) regarding the transparency of the 2009 parliamentary elections. !e government and the opposition were unable to resolve their disagreements over the investigation into the elections, slowing down the reform process significantly. !erefore, the stalemate had direct implications on the country’s political development and Albania’s progress toward EU integration. A “conditional relation” with the parliament was established by SP deputies, resulting in their absence from voting on laws until the issue of the election’s transparency was settled. !e legislative agenda was heavily affected by this situation, and no laws or appointments of high state officials requiring a qualified majority were approved. !e United States, EU, and Council of Europe increasingly intensified their lobbying in order to resolve the political crisis and facilitate dialogue between the two parties, but with limited success. Due to the paralyzing e ects of the prolonged political crisis, Albania’s national democratic governance rating declines from 4.50 to 4.75. Electoral Process. !e parliamentary elections of June 2009 continued to greatly influence the political agenda of Albania during 2010. !e SP and other opposition Albania 51 parties demanded that a parliamentary committee be set up to investigate the electoral process. !e government and ruling PD party claimed that all legal steps with regard to electoral disputes had been exhausted, and were willing to accept an inquiry as long as ballot boxes were not scrutinized. As a consequence, the entire political debate was centered on this issue, and electoral reform could not proceed until a resolution was agreed upon. In mid-November, the SP softened its stance, offering to inquire only into the election material boxes and dropping its demand to scrutinize the ballot boxes—the request most staunchly opposed by the ruling party—but still to no avail. According to the electoral code, the deadline for amendments is six months prior to a general or administrative election. With the next local administrative elections set to be held on May 8, 2011, the last opportunity to undertake electoral reform or to address the recommendations of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE)–Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) report in the electoral code was in November 2010. However, the unresolved row over the investigation into the 2009 parliamentary elections compromised the reform process and legal actions needed to address the identified shortcomings in the country’s electoral system. Albania’s electoral process rating drops from 3.75 to 4.00. Civil Society. Albanian civil society generally operates in a nonrestrictive environment, but it faces many important challenges concerning capacities, impact, and credibility in public life. Composed of small organizations mainly operating in the capital, Tirana, the civic sector is characterized by problems with continuity of financing and fundamentally donor-driven agendas. State financial support began in 2010 through the Agency for Support to Civil Society (ASCS). Yet, the civic sector in Albania is rarely consulted in policymaking (with the exception, to a certain extent, of the visa liberalization process) and has low visibility in public life, with citizens generally apathetic and distanced from civic engagement. Trade unions remain relatively weak. Albanian civil society operates in an overall unclear fiscal regulatory framework. Albania’s civil society rating remains at 3.00. Independent Media. Albanian media have advanced technologically, but a lack of independence and transparency of financial resources continued to be concerns in 2010. !e use of multimedia formats and the internet to provide information increased during the year. However, there was the risk of misuse of these developing forms of information dissemination due to the absence of a legal framework to provide proper regulation. Strong government ties to the former and current chairs of the National Council of Radio and Television (NCRT) showed that this institution was still far from being independent. Freelance journalism is not regulated and little practiced in Albania, increasing even further the dependence of journalists on media owners. !e public service broadcaster, Radio Televizioni Shqiptar (RTSH), remained underdeveloped in terms of technology and program content compared with private broadcasters. RTSH information programs were biased, providing excessive coverage to government activities or high political representatives while 52 Nations in Transit 2011 giving little space to other public actors. State-funded advertisements were limited to two or three media companies, constituting a near monopoly and shrinking the resources available to other media operators. Albania’s independent media rating remains at 4.00. Local Democratic Governance. During 2010, Albania’s central government continued to undertake legal actions and initiatives that hampered the capacity of local officials to exercise their responsibilities, in conflict with local autonomy principles enshrined in the constitution and international conventions ratified by the country. !ese actions often put the central and local governments at odds, stopped the advancement and consolidation of decentralization reform in Albania, and narrowed the space for local governance by reducing local authorities’ competences and drying up their financial resources. Albania’s rating for local democratic governance worsens from 3.00 to 3.25. Judicial Framework and Independence. Guaranteeing rule of law and judicial independence remained a challenge for Albania in 2010. Judicial reform was still considered incomplete, and there was no progress in revising and adopting some of the most important laws, including the Law on National Judicial Conference, the Law on Judicial Administration, and the Law on Establishment of Administrative Court and Administrative Justices. !e overall political stalemate also negatively influenced the judicial-reform process. !e parliament failed to approve the law on administrative courts and administrative disputes. !e Constitutional Court and High Court began the process of replacing members; one third of the Constitutional Court and 4 out of 17 members of the High Court are to be replaced. So far, the parliament has rejected most of the candidates proposed by President Bamir Topi. Although the lustration law has not been officially implemented in Albania due to the constitutional concerns it raises, the spirit of the law served as the basis for the parliament’s rejection of one of the candidates.