Memorie.al publishes some documents issued by the Central State Archive (fund of the former Central Committee of the ALP), where there is a voluminous file with archival materials which bear the logo ‘Top secret’, which belong to the period of years 1981-1982, with reports, reports, evidence, information, minutes of the meetings of the Politburo and the secretariat of the Central Committee of the ALP, etc., starting from what was held to review and analyze the self-criticism of the former Prime Minister Mehmet Shehu in December 1981, because he had allowed the engagement of his son, Skënder, “with a girl who had some political fugitives in her family circle”, the marathon meeting of the Politburo on the afternoon of December 17 his year that lasted until the late hours of that night, where that problem was discussed with the debates and discussions of all members who “crucified” former Prime Minister Shehu, the meeting of the morning of December 18, after the news that Prime Minister Mehme Shehu had killed himself, the marathon meeting of the Secretariat of the Central Committee of the ALP on September 20, 1982, with the topic: “Analysis of serious mistakes of Kadri Hazbiu, committed during the period when he was deputy minister and minister of Internal Affairs “, where Enver Hoxha initially launched accusations against Kadri Hazbiu, luring him as a” loyalist of the Party “, (in order for him to” open the heart of the Party “, speaking against former Prime Minister Mehmet Shehu) , where at the beginning of his speech, Enver said: “After the coup in the army, we discovered the traitorous group in economics of Abdyl Këllez, Koço Theodhos and Kiço Ngjela with friends. We also discovered this group here; it was not discovered by the State Security. The same can be said about the discovery of the group of Fadil Paçrami, Todi Lubonja and a number of other people connected with them, such as Ismail Kadareja with friends, the Security did not reveal, but that hostile work was discovered by the Committee Central, etc. ”! All these and other documents with the logo ‘Top secret’, will be published in several issues in a row, exclusively by Memorie.al.
Continued from the previous issue
ALBANIAN LABOR PARTY
CENTRAL SECRETARY COMMITTEE
PROCESS – VERBAL
OF THE MEETING OF THE POLITICAL BUREAU OF THE CENTRAL AFFAIRS OF THE ALP DATES
17 E 18 DECEMBER 1981
Agenda: Analysis of the serious mistake made by the member of the Politburo, Mehmet Shehu, regarding the engagement of a boy with a girl with a very bad political composition.
This meeting is attended by all members of the Politburo, with the exception of Comrade Hekuran Isai, who did not come because his mother died last night.
COMRADE PALI MISKA: No one is immune from mistakes or shortcomings at work. You made the mistake, Comrade Mehmet, to go to the First Secretary of the Central Committee and tell him the mistake you made, not to leave it until Comrade Enver told you, what you should have told him and you should you had expressed it to him, or you should have reported it to him. If this had happened to a simple communist, he would surely have come to the secretary of the grassroots organization, and you did not even go to the secretary of the organization’s bureau.
(Comrade Enver intervenes here and explains that: Mehmeti did not go to the secretary of the bureau of the organization in the Prime Minister, therefore he had advised him to clarify the issue in the Politburo, then to go to the organization).
Sorry I did not know this detail, I pull it until you said we look at it first in the Politburo, and then to the secretary of the organization, or to Comrade Muho, who was secretary of the bureau there.
So when you speak, you ask others to apply the discipline rigorously, and here it does well, so you should ask yourself, the same discipline and rigorously in its implementation in the way of the Party.
Comrade Mehmet, in his self-criticism, says that my right foot slipped. I say and I think that this is not an accidental slip that while walking, you stepped on a smooth and round stone, and your foot slipped. Jo. I do not judge so. Comrade Mehmet slipped with both feet and not accidentally. This slip is the result of all that brought him here.
You were letting go in principle, I think, you are bound to trigger, you were letting go once, you are bound to let go many more times and then that becomes the way. We must make sure that our children do not think about them, and no longer propagandize, I emphasize this, the ugly clothes and other manifestations of bourgeois-revisionist life, become the cause for the destruction of the healthy social environment that is in our country.
These ugly shows, you have not seen in your family, comrade Mehmet, but you have not stopped or condemned them, you have allowed them to thicken and become dangerous, both for your family and for our entire society. There are many examples, and these were mentioned by friends, so there is no need to say more.
Comrade Mehmet, he should look at the problem more broadly and not tell us here that my right foot slipped, reducing this issue only in the last case of Skënder. The last case I think was the product and consequence of all that continuum of omissions that characterizes your practice. The people say: ‘what you sow, you will reap’. Do you see what is happening here? What happened to you is the product of an attitude and action that you have thought about before.
Even taking under the protection of comrade Fiqret and Skënder is wrong, in my opinion this also burdens comrade Mehmet even more. Fiqreti in many issues, but also in the latter, has been provocative, has known the issue and has certainly influenced Comrade Mehmet. She has a heavy responsibility for all those shows and manifestations that have appeared to your children and for the unjust concepts that Fiqret himself has, for the whole way of life in your family. Therefore, she should not be defended by you, Comrade Mehmet, but she should be severely criticized by you and for the responsibility she has, she should be punished as well.
The attitude that you hold even today towards Skënder, in my opinion, is very, very wrong. We said this in the interventions as well. He, personally from you, should have been brought here immediately and taken to a company outside Tirana, to work in the midst of a collective and in difficult conditions to gather mint, as the people say, and not to wander up and down in Sweden, as if nothing had happened to him.
I have heard, I do not know how true this is, that even there, he has led a debauched life, there have been manifestations of immorality, etc. If he was another man, we would have brought him, and Skënder, like your son, that is, the prime minister, should have been returned immediately, you should have done this yourself, without asking anyone.
This action would be in your honor, comrade Mehmet, and in the interest of the work, and the public would welcome him very well, because he has learned what happened to your son and your family.
This mistake of comrade Mehmet is very serious. He has other mistakes in his work, such as the tendency to monopolize the work and competencies in the center, to the manifestations of arrogance, even arrogance, which he has manifested in meetings of the Government, the presidency, as well as in meetings special with us. All of these things have obviously damaged the job and put him in charge.
Recently, it is seen that he has withdrawn from such shows, and even cases of confusion at work are noticed in him. This should not have happened, but he should have gathered himself, to find the causes that brought him here, to then find the possibility of correcting and correcting them. Of course he finds it very difficult to make the right turn, especially in some directions, but I think that the interests of the work and the Party, require him to do so.
COMRADE RITA MARKO: We heard the answers to the questions that were asked to him, but comrade Mehmet, for this serious political mistake he has made, I see that he has not reflected properly yet. In my opinion, what is analyzed in the self-criticism and in the answers he gave, are not the main causes that led to the mistake of the engagement of comrade Mehmet’s son, with the daughter of a bad family circle, enemies of popular power.
I think that this political mistake of Comrade Mehmet will be seen in relation to the nature of his stay at work, with his work and family people, who often contradict the norms of the Party. Comrade Mehmet, he greatly overestimates his opinion and the orders he gives.
This is evident in all his activity. He hardly accepts a remark, or a piece of advice, especially when it is addressed to his work, or in some way related to it. It is heavy in conversations, does not create an environment for people to freely express their opinion and even more so to make remarks and criticisms. So, what comrade Mehmet says is not correct, that if my friends pointed out to me, I would correct this mistake.
I think that this was not even taken into account by Comrade Mehmet, he was not even thought of at the time when he did this, nor was it thought that if it were so, to take into account the opinion, or the remarks of the public, I would explain this and Comrade Kadri. Comrade Enver has stayed closer to him, he has given him all those advices, so he had all the opportunities to ask him about this case as well and to get the necessary advice, as he gave him that this engagement was broken, This is so much that comrade Enver went to him. But comrade Mehmet went to Pogradec, and there was an opportunity to raise this issue.
I think that Comrade Mehmet does not take into account the message of the Party and Comrade Enver that the member of the party is under double control, both of the Party, but also of the opinion of the masses. This he did not take into account as I said. He is also harsh in conversations; he loses the patience he reaches until he even offends people severely. I remember one day, some time ago, when he insulted in a government meeting, very seriously, the chairman of the Executive Committee of Tirana, comrade Nesip Ibrahimi, who is also the candidate of the Central Committee of the ALP, with very serious words, which it seems to me do not agree with the style and method of work of the Party.
He said to him: anti-party, measures must be taken against you, you are not on the road, and some other expressions. This is so, and Nesip cried. So, comrade Mehmet, he was kidnapped, he was nervous and he crossed every border, although from time to time, he pretends to correct what he does, I think, these things happen that he does not reflect, but the Party has the power to correct him, that Comrade Mehmet to be put on the right path in these directions, because we are harming the Party.
He has done so not only with Comrade Nesip, but also with other comrades, for example the Minister of Internal Trade. This is not the right way. As my friends told me, in government meetings, he spoke very harshly to Viktor Nushi about the issue of vegetables, saying: you are not a minister; you should be fired, and so on. But these things are not done that way, because then all the boundaries are crossed and then people talk.
This behavior of comrade Mehmet with the cadres and people has damaged the work of the Party and it is not just a momentary case in a Government meeting, but these actions are an expression of his arrogance, overestimation of himself and underestimation of his others. The framework should be helped, encouraged, and listened to and not suppressed, because this damages the work of the Party. To some extent the attitude and behavior of comrade Mehmet, has done what…
COMRADE ENVER HOXHA: Have you been to any meeting that you have seen that comrade Mehmet acted like that?
COMRADE RITA MARKO: I was for Nesip.
COMRADE ENVER HOXHA: Did you intervene?
COMRADE RITA MARKO: No, I did not intervene.
COMRADE ENVER HOXHA: Why did not you intervene?
COMRADE RITA MARKO: I did not intervene, Comrade Enver, I also asked myself, why did I not intervene, yes, I do not keep it a secret, I did not intervene there…!
COMRADE ENVER HOXHA: Why did not you intervene, as a member of the Politburo?
COMRADE RITA MARKO: I did not intervene because I did not have the civil courage.
COMRADE ENVER HOXHA: How did you not have the courage? If he had told you there, he would not have repeated it, or he could have repeated it, and you would have said it again.
COMRADE RITA MARKO: Comrade Enver is right to criticize. This, in my opinion, has made his comrades not raise many problems in front of him, or not talk directly to him as prime minister. Comrade Mehmet creates the impression that he is dealing with the most important problems and that is how it is, he tries to deal with the most important problems, he always tells us to deal with problems as well.
Then, while this is so, why does not comrade Mehmet, for example, influence the other comrades of the presidency to grasp the most important problems related to the strengthening of power, the fight against bureaucracy, and other problems that he has constantly raised the party, for which measures have been taken? This is contradictory, therefore in this regard; Mehmeti should look at his method of work.
I think that even the self-criticism he made, should have been deepened by Comrade Mehmet in the method of his work, to draw more lessons from the criticism and advice of the Party, for the work you lead and more for yourself. The very character of our work requires that the cadres work in the organs of power and in other organs, to be characterized by the spirit of contact with the people, with the masses, the patience to listen to them, while Comrade Mehmet, is very heavy in contacts with people, with the masses.
Even with the organization of measures, he should cooperate better and better evaluate their opinions and work, help with concrete measures, and not only in principle. This, among other things, will lead to the improvement of the work, because a more prudent and more careful attitude of Comrade Mehmet, taking into account his function as Prime Minister, would lead to a better capture of advanced experience, of the standardization of work and materials in the same branches, or in better support and encouragement of initiatives arising from the masses, for the advancement of tasks, or any other problem.
Now even the comrades who cooperate with comrade Mehmet, the main comrades of the Government for such actions, that they have been more in contact, could have helped and could have criticized more and intervened. I could do this better too. In general on these issues, I think Comrade Mehmet should draw lessons.
As for omissions in the family, such as those in clothing, in inappropriate living, in one way or another, these have caught the eye of the public; people see and have the right to ask. Do not these comrades Mehmet stand out, as bad actions, that the Party publicly criticizes and, if he fights and has criticized these, then why does he approve them, why does it create conditions for children to develop more these shows?!
Why is comrade Mehmet not ready to denounce these publicly? I am for him to denounce them in the Party when he sees these things. It does not seem right to me that the son of comrade Mehmet, after making this mistake, was sent to study outside and walk, even accompanied by people, without giving any account for these mistakes? Even the little boy and his wife, who have come to prominence for extravagant outfits, are also sent out. However, by being treated this way, they can make much more serious mistakes.
Do not these conditions influence the development of these errors? I think they influence children for bad, because they are privileges that do not belong to them. Therefore, Skënder’s engagement to this girl, which comes from a family with a bad attitude, is related to these attitudes, not only of the boy, but also of his friend Mehmet and his wife Fiqret, who approved this engagement and did not take into account the instructions and the teachings of the Party, detached these in their concrete case.
I am also responsible for these; there are also the relevant bodies that allow such things, because even these, such as the State Security bodies, the financial ones, which approve such, we could intervene. You, comrade Mehmet, looked at these things, but you have never asked yourself where and how these means are provided? This is how I judge the mistake of comrade Mehmet, therefore I am of the opinion that he should carefully analyze the criticism that the Party is making for these serious mistakes and reflect on it at work. This is for the good of the Party and his. We love the good without telling her. /Memorie.al
Continues in the next issue