Concession of Butrint, Zhupa: Custom laws like this, concern for DASH and competence of SPAK

PD MP, Ina Zhupa has brought the denunciation of the Butrint concession back to attention.

In a statement to the media, Zhupa says that laws of this nature that regulate the relationship only between the two parties (the state and the concessionaire) are already under the attention of the US Department of State and international organizations.

According to Zhupa, just like the procedure followed of the project idea, proposal, drafting and the way it was reached until the signing of the Butrint administration agreement and its approval by law also falls within the competence of investigation and judgment by the Special SPAK structure.

Full statement:

As we have done transparently, we will continue publishing the government's positions on the Butrint concession during the constitutional trial.

The government has rejected the questions and explanations of the information in an open manner and bypassing and trampling the authority of the Constitutional Court and the constitutional trial process itself.

As we have evidenced before the Court, the process of how it is predetermined who will receive the concession, the reasons why it went to this concessionary form, the privileges and the custom law for AADF and the usurpation of state powers by private entities with special protection, is also important. thus violated the constitution of the country.

4 of the other questions the government refuses to answer:

1 Are you aware, as the Council of Ministers, that a management plan was made by Giora Solar for Butrint and why was this plan that was paid for not accepted?
We clarify to the public that this plan was paid for by the AADF and was not accepted to be published and disappeared by the AADF because it did not envisage concessionary forms for Butrint, as was the interest of the AADF.

How has the Council of Ministers justified the lack of provision of concrete guarantees and real punitive measures in case of violation of the agreement by the AADF, I quote article 31 of the agreement: The parties agree that the AADF enjoys immunity and rights provided by the bilateral economic agreement . In case we would perform actions contrary to the agreement, will they avoid the responsibilities referring to this provision that you have placed in the agreement?

Do you know of any USAID projects for Butrint?

The concept of "cultural tourism" is the legal space [based on the AAEF-AADF Transfer Act brought by the CM] that has been used by the AADF until now for interventions in the "cultural heritage" in Albania, as in Butrint, but also in Lake Ohrid, in the Amphitheater of Durrës, etc. Do you agree with the statement that the concept of "cultural tourism" is completely different from "cultural heritage" and that "cultural tourism" does not enjoy protection nor is it provided for in the Constitution of Albania?

The Council of Ministers refused to respond in writing. The rejection of these answers clearly shows that:
A) we are dealing with a custom law, similar to the Fusha law for the theater, with the difference that the AADF Law for Butrint is even more dangerous because of the excavations and the history related to Butrint.
B) they cannot argue why AADF is treated with special protection in case it violates the interests related to the integrity, findings, conservation, and good management of Butrint.
C) That they deliberately confuse cultural tourism with cultural heritage. The first is related to the private domain and the second to the public domain and prerogative of the state and protected by the constitution.
D) That it was not requested by USAID, nor by other institutions such as UNESCO, etc., nor by other foundations that provide donations or assistance to Butrint, if the government was looking for a donor for 5 million usd.

This refusal clarifies the Constitutional Court and the public opinion that the Albanian state has made a custom law, putting the state interests and the public interest in a secondary role and placing itself at the disposal of a predetermined private party that, not coincidentally, makes the legal framework itself, makes the plan of self-management also takes the unesco world heritage itself.

Laws of this nature that regulate the relationship only between the two parties (the state and the concessionaire) are already under the attention of the US Department of State and international organizations, as well as the procedure followed for the project idea, proposal, drafting and the way it was reached until the signature of the Butrint administration agreement and its approval by law also falls within the competence of investigation and judgment by the Special SPAK structure.

Transparency International states that the problem of corruption in Albania is those issues that are part of legislative corruption, that is, of custom laws.

"Laws made specifically for one or several persons/subjects, which stamp and legitimize the privatization of public institutions and resources, making it legal - writes IT for Albania in the Report on "State Capture".

Therefore, the Constitutional Court has the historic chance with Butrint that, in addition to serving the implementation of the constitution and the protection of our national heritage, also to overthrow the model of custom laws, which destroy the rule of law and constitutional and democratic principles.