BY ROLAND QAFOKU
The interview of former Deputy Prime Minister Arben Ahmetaj was undoubtedly a media scoop of at least the last 4-5 years. In the competition of the inability to get each other’s guests on the shows, the journalist Çlirim Peka had the merit of breaking all these “rules” on Thursday in my prime and captured the 1st screen viewership pod, making the agenda of the media dictates the agenda of politics and not the other way around.
For 2 hours, 30 minutes and 11 seconds, Peka made them follow only her, while social networks have been supplied as raw material for a long time. Those who have done interviews know and know very well what an effort it is to get such a scoop, and Peka, beyond any prejudice, has the merit of bringing to the public the most sought-after character of justice and not only that.
While those who have not done even one interview in their career, let them continue to criticize that this is the only job they do. But beyond the balance of colleague Peka, who included in this interview in his CV, for the sake of truth, the expectations for what Ahmetaj would say were many times greater. What we understood was that Peka gave him the necessary space to speak, but precisely this space Arben Ahmetaj did not justify.
The former number two in the government advertised himself as having been a good politician, an equally good MP and a much better minister and deputy prime minister, and that he had deserved these positions thanks to some special skills. He advertised himself as having been an administrator that we were lucky to have, that he had reduced the public debt and reduced PPPs. All these are not little, always according to him. However, Ahmetaj’s tone was related to his relations with the prime minister and the issue of incinerators and not how good he had been throughout his career in politics. The repeated phrase in English “by the way” and the name of Maximilien Robespierre, attacking the government and SPAK, did not help at all to be clear to the public. There were other expectations for the opinion. Arben Ahmetaj not only did not clarify at least 10 issues, but added to the public’s doubts about him.
First, Arben Ahmetaj did not provide any written evidence, documented evidence, photographs or videos to constitute evidence, or counter-evidence, for all the accusations he made during the interview. We were all waiting for him to shake on the screen a legal proof for everyone he impeached. He did not advertise any document with someone’s signature, or with his own signature, to prove the serious accusations against the prime minister, or his associates, about how corrupt they were. His suggestions during the interview that Peka investigate was just unconscious humor. Peka and his staff know what Peka and his television were investigating. We expected that in this interview Ahmetaj would make public his investigations that he had done when he was the number two of the government, but he never did that.
Secondly, Arben Ahmetaj confirmed that he continues to divert justice. He has not even faced up to now and with what he said during the interview, he will continue not to face justice. He will continue to be a fugitive despite the clarification he gave that his absence was initially related to the fact that he was on vacation. Only Arben Ahmetaj can understand how a person goes on vacation and, moreover, outside of Albania when the whole of Albania wants him. An innocent person faces justice and does not evade it. Fight with it even when you think it is unfavorable. Arben Ahmetaj has not even done it until now and with what he said, the chances are that he will not face it. Actually this is to his detriment.
Thirdly, Arben Ahmetaj did not provide any counter-evidence for himself that he is washed from the story of the incinerators. He did not provide any document, any countersignature, photo, or video that was not part of the criminal offense. The word that he was not part of the proceedings is what he thinks. But in fact SPAK officially claims otherwise. His complaint that they also checked the expense invoices of 2.7 million new lek just for the repair of the water and sanitation system of his ex-wife is not only not an excuse, but it puts him into implication as it is known that one of the methods of investigation in modern times is following the money or as Ahmetaj repeated in the interview “Follow the money”. And… 2.7 million just for hydrosanitary is actually not such a small figure.
Fourthly, Arben Ahmetaj did not provide any evidence, none against the Prime Minister that he abused his office. Even the insistence of colleague Peka to prove this, Ahmetaj only clarified with words. Ahmetaj did not provide any evidence, details or data that Edi Rama committed a criminal offense as prime minister. As much as Arben Ahmetaj said about Rama, only Berisha tells him from morning to night. The opinion expected Ahmetaj to show details of how the Minister of Defense works, how he functions in the position of head of government, how he communicates with his subordinates, how he signs and where he signs and how he makes decisions. Who does he consult with, who does he listen to and who does he favor? But Edi Rama’s deputy, who has been closer than anyone else, said none of this. The only new thing was that Rama said that Ahmetaj “would go to his place”. Of course, this is a heavy phrase, but it is so unclear why it was said that let’s prove it if Rama and two or three of his associates say that he did not say it. Had Ahmetaj objected to Rama for some affair, and Rama said in anger that he would “make amends”? Had Ahmetaj opposed any firm and Rama took it as a challenge? Ahmetaj said none of this.
Fifth, Arben Ahmetaj told himself that he is in contact with foreign diplomats. This smacks of nobody believing that foreign ambassadors and diplomats can communicate with a wanted person. Ahmetaj may have sent documentary materials to them. Even by mail, but in no case was this called communication. Ahmetaj advertised himself that they were almost the ones who protected him, which makes it quite believable.
Sixth, it was serious for the sake of the truth what Ahmetaj said and he and his family were threatened with their lives. Of course this is unacceptable and is definitely a crime. However, Ahmetaj should not have passed this with a phrase “I told Bledi Çuçi”. Ahmetaj should have filed a concrete complaint about the threats he had received and the police and together with him the prosecution should have investigated it very seriously. But in fact he has not done so and that leaves a lot of ambiguity.
Seventh, Ahmetaj’s accusations against the media were not acceptable at all. He mentioned there some televisions and some journalists and these attacks are against him. I am not discussing at all whether these media and journalists have become part of this scandal. But to say that Top Channel made a special show for him at the behest of Edi Rama, you must have convincing evidence. That a television makes news, chronicles and shows, is the most basic job. But for the prime minister himself or with his people to organize a special show for a single politician is absurd and a completely unnecessary investment. Arben Ahmetaj should have said this when it happened and not after a year.
Eighth, Arben Ahmetaj also accused and attacked SPAK and the new justice institutions. In one of his sentences he said that “it is known who takes them, who influences them and who dictates this structure”. This was the most serious accusation against SPAK. Who? That we don’t know who. Ahmetaj should have been clear and precise in the accusations against him. If he had evidence and facts that Rama took SPAK prosecutors and dictated, he should have accompanied this with evidence and facts and not with questions.
Ninth, Arben Ahmetaj confessed about how Edi Rama dismissed him from the post of deputy prime minister, but not how Rama appointed him. He showed how a photo he had taken of a fellow minister in Rogner’s lobby when he had longingly embraced the owner of a media outlet. We accept this reason for dismissal. But Mr. Ametaj should have shown why Edi Rama had appointed him and made him his closest collaborator. What were his skills and qualities? Why Rama trusted him to be his closest person and what was the proof that he had earned this trust. These Ahmetaj did not show and clarified.
Tenth, Arben Ahmetaj did not say whether during the 10 years in power he had shared anything different with Prime Minister Edi Rama. He did not say whether he had ever challenged the prime minister for wrong decisions. He did not show whether what the opposition accuses him of is true. In a question that Peka rightly addressed to him if he had talked about the cannabisization of the country, Ahmetaj’s answer remains iconic: I objected by drafting appropriate fiscal policies. You have no idea how to get this answer. Ambiguity, or humor.
