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 ENVER HOXHA: The only thing you have to do was not done by Mehmeti and this is related to the coldness, or as it were to the closure in front of this mistake, that he informed his friends very shallowly, until you become self-critical. Maybe, as I helped you, your friends would help you during this time, and we would eliminate all these questions and some things we could have said to them socially, rather than officially. So in your consciousness, even a difficult situation can be created, a state of despair. Now the mistake has been made and we are trying to leave nothing to you from these despairs, so contact with friends, before the meeting takes place, would be a help to you.
COMRADE MEHMET SHEHU: It is right, criticism is right. One more question: Why did you allow yourself when you would not allow another? This was also discussed here.
Next: Should sentimentality go beyond the interests of the Party?
In no way should, in my concrete case they exceeded and damaged the interest of the Party.
These were the questions I was asked.
COMRADE SIMON STEFANI: The issue we are analyzing has to do with the violation of the Party line in one of its most cardinal points, such as the always straightforward development of the class struggle. The arguments brought up in Comrade Mehmet’s self-criticism and in the answers he gave to the questions posed here are not convincing and do not draw the ideological roots of error. You embarked on this crooked path, in my opinion, not accidentally, not unintentionally, because, to get to know the girl’s family, you had complete information before deciding on the engagement. In addition to the information provided to you by the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the girl’s father spoke to Skënder, both through the girl and directly about the composition of his family. Skënderi talked to you and returned the answer, saying: “I am not the youngest, I talked to my parents about everything”, etc.
So your actions were not made in a hurry, as you say, because you had enough time to judge, measure and weigh the step you took in Skënder’s engagement. But at this moment you forgot the Party line, its norms, you forgot the class struggle, you put the interests of your son and family above the interests of the Party. I have the right to say that in this matter we are dealing with intentional violations of the Party line, of its norms, therefore the explanations made by you for the reasons that led you to this wrong conclusion are not convincing.
The sentimentality that you try to argue as a negative element has to do with your worldview and does not explain the roots of the error. It is taken as a means to justify what you did. In the material where your self-criticism is presented, then say that I lost the Marxist logic in making this decision. We ask the question why did you lose logic, when the party constantly teaches us that every step we take in life goes well, how much does this serve the revolution, the people, our Party?
You, knowing well the girl’s family, did not work to separate Skënder from this girl, you were giving consent for his engagement with her. You also did not ask to talk and consult with friends to help, since you were dealing with such a family, but you discussed and resolved this issue within the family and in flagrant contradiction with the norms of the Party.
What is your conclusion? Why did Skënderi choose this girl who comes from a family with a bad political attitude, and did not try to connect with a girl from a family with a good political attitude? Has he been disorganized in life and disregarded the norms of our society? How could he not have any responsibility before society, before the laws, before the discipline of the Party? In the base organization of the Party where Fiqreti belongs, the communists said that Skënderi once again got involved with a girl with a bad and immoral attitude, and even called the district Party Committee for this.
Now that he is studying abroad, you have created conditions outside the norms and rules we have for other students. I do not understand why you do all this, comrade Mehmet? In my opinion, your son, for the grave guilt he committed, should not have gone abroad again, so I think he should return to Albania immediately and give an account to the party-based organization as a communist.
Also, your wrong attitude towards Skënder’s engagement cannot be related to the concessions you have made and to the behaviors and attitudes of the other boy, Bashkim and his bride, who have become propagandists of fashion with inappropriate clothing. Then she also associates with uncontrolled and suspicious people. All these actions and attitudes of your children are not coincidences; they have to do with significant shortcomings in their education.
You certainly go for the actions and attitudes of your children that do not conform to the norms of our society, which our sound opinion does not tolerate or accept. Then why not take action against them? Why are you so principled and strict with others, and so liberal with your children? By your actions and attitudes, you have thus fallen into right-wing opportunism, you have softened the class struggle, and you have violated the Party line.
In your self-criticism, you list some of your traits or vices, as we can call them, such as abduction, subjectivism, arrogance, haste in making decisions, etc. But in your work in running the state, in making quick and unstudied decisions, how much these weaknesses have influenced you; you did not tell us this, despite the fact that I asked the question. What conclusions have you drawn, why does this phenomenon occur? I think that in you these are not manifestations, but phenomena. They have been constantly repeated in your work, in your activity as a cadre, as a communist, and which to some extent have caused great damage to the work of the Party.
You and your friends reprimand you or disagree with your thoughts, you do not have the patience to listen to them, to appreciate their thoughts and often times you go into arrogance to the point of insult. It comes down to the fact that you think about the good of the job, while others do not. This unjust attitude has made people, your subordinates, not to say their thoughts freely, to be repressed, not to have initiative and self-action in their work. So to some extent you have lacked the application of the principle of collegiality in discussing problems and making decisions. This has caused the comrades to say that this or that action will be because Comrade Mehmet gave the order, and not as a result of a joint decision.
This is because the idea has been cultivated that only you can make the right decisions, while others have to implement them. This is a negative practice that has to do with not evaluating other cadres, with not applying the principle of collegiality, as I said above. These that I mentioned and many others have to do with your style and method, which is behind the great tasks posed by Comrade Enver’s Party. You are therefore required to make radical changes to your style and method of work.
You in self-criticism, talk about immunity from the influence of the class enemy, especially from the danger of right-wing opportunism. Opportunism as right-wing, and left-wing, are the same. If you were criticized for left-wing opportunism, it is easy to switch to the right. Comrade Enver in one of his works: “We cannot ignore the fact that in the current conditions of the siege, of the all-round imperialist-revisionist pressure, we are too far from to think that we are immune from dangers.”
These lessons of the Party those are for today and tomorrow current for the communists and cadres, have not been taken into account by you. The conclusion I draw is that you think that these lessons, and this Party line, are not about you, that they are about others, that they can be infected by this pressure while you are immune. By not having in mind what I said above, you are paving the way for liberalism, which in whatever form it appears, is essentially an expression of ideological and political opportunism.
Thoughts expressed as the desire to marry the boy since he is 32 years old, or looking at the close circle of the girl’s family, the differentiation that you were able to make to the Turdi family, are pragmatic and opportunistic judgments. Also the thoughts that he solves such issues himself, that he judges them correctly, that he is not wrong, that he takes responsibility or the thought that I take the girl in our family, and not others, because she is 20 years old, will not influence to us, etc., it only shows arrogance that you are not wrong, that you are immune from the pressures of the class enemy, but it also speaks of a selfish judgment that separates yourself and your family, from your position in the Party.
Even when it comes to differentiation for the family, you are acting wrongly and contrary to Party norms. The party has specified in time, with special instructions in its documents, which are called family members, and close relatives. If you refer to these Party materials, you will be helped not to make the mistakes you made, you will not create new names like “close family” or “extended family”.
I think that Comrade Mehmet will draw lessons and conclusions from all this great help that the Party is giving and Comrade Enver, in his work and everywhere, not to make such mistakes, which bring great harm to the Party. But it is necessary for him to work harder, to know well and deeply, the norms of the Party. To fight for them to be implemented accurately and without concessions, by himself and by everyone else. Keep in mind the criticisms of comrades Mehmet, that once again you have been criticized by the Party, but you have not always reflected and made corrections in your activity.
So do not forget the criticisms of friends. Be simpler, with the communists, with the cadres, with the subordinates, and with other people, and do not make them think that your word is the last word of science for all the issues and problems that come up, you just solve them you and no one else. No, issues and problems are solved on the basis of laws, orientations, competencies, norms, set by the Party and nothing more.
Even the comrades who work in the apparatus of the Prime Minister like comrade Adil, comrade Manush, comrade Qirjako, comrade Pali, in the activity of comrade Mehmet, have seen flaws and weaknesses, they have seen that he has made mistakes, that there are obvious flaws in the method of work, etc. But they did not criticize him, and they did not stay in the meetings of the government, nor in those of the basic organization of the Party, as well as here in the high forum of the Party. Why they did not do this, it is good and they should tell us.
I think that Comrade Mehmet should be punished according to the norms of the Party. I can say it later after the discussions, and how he will react, but I am saying it even now that he, as a communist, should be punished, with serious remarks with a note on the registration card.
Surely from this meeting I too, will draw lessons in my life.
COMRADE PALI MISKA: Comrade Mehmet’s self-criticism, despite the many pages that have been written by him, does not answer what is the main thing, what pushed him, what wrong concept and thoughts he had that brought him here, to carry out such an action which constitutes a great political error, which contradicts our policy of developing class warfare, and goes in open accordance with the enemy of the class.
Those excuses that comrade Mehmet lists, such as sentimentality towards Skënder, his abducting character, subjectivism and bias at work, lack of necessary tact in requesting an account, closing in on family issues, displays of arrogance and others, in its indeed they are not the ones who brought you here, but there are some thoughts and views that contradict what the Party teaches us.
Comrade Mehmet also has misconceptions about the class struggle. He does not try to match words with deeds; he does not see fit to do what others have to do for him. What all young people want to do, in behavior, dress, and actions, he does not see as necessary for his family members. These are wrong thoughts and actions on the part of Comrade Mehmet. Even the displays of sentimentality there have their source. We should not be like that, towards the bourgeois-revisionist ideology, Comrade Enver’s Party has constantly instructed us.
Here I think that the wrong concepts applied in the family of comrade Mehmet, have their source of mistakes. He also has misconceptions about the influence of bourgeois-revisionist ideology. Comrade Enver teaches us that: “The most dangerous enemy is the one who is forgotten.” To forget that you too are vulnerable to bourgeois-revisionist influence is a very big mistake. With the actions done by comrade Mehmet, calling himself and in particular Fiqreti, that they are immunized and that they are so capable and clear that there is nothing that the enemy does to them, then he has violated the Party line. To think that you will influence the education of the son’s bride, and of the family circle with bad political composition, and not to think that it was what influenced you, so much so that you made friends with him, is a big mistake. In this case, it has affected to such an extent that only we know, while neither the boy nor Fiqret know anything. The enemy, in this case aims at great depths, to establish friendship with the Prime Minister. He, who has fought and is fighting us, comes and sits down for lunch at the Prime Minister, their daughter is allowed to walk with the Prime Minister’s son, even to Greece and Sweden, and with the insistence of Fiqret himself, but maybe also of his friend Mehmet.
Here’s what the point is when you call yourself immune and infallible. The concrete fact speaks for itself how on a sunny day, what you fought yesterday, you have cross-legged at the corner of the house chimney today. Must be added various vigilance the enemy of the class, acts.
I also think that Comrade Mehmet has wrong and wrong thoughts on the discipline in our Party. He raises the issues of discipline forcefully and we have heard him speak and ask others to strictly enforce the discipline. But he, forgets himself here, forgets that he too must implement it just like all other communists. Comrade Enver teaches us that: “In the Party, there is only one discipline” that it, is obligatory for all its members, without exception, be they workers, cooperatives, clerks, officials, or leaders. No one escapes the Party discipline. Memorie.al
The next issue follows