(On behalf of the “Save Vlora” Grouping)

To destroy protected areas, to give away Albanian territory, to violate state laws, to treat the sea and coastline as private property, and then accuse protesters of being “Greek spies,” is diversion and an insult to citizens.

The Prime Minister carried out the same kind of diversion with Flag Square, which he disfigured, damaging the symbolism and historical identity of Vlora.

Albanian law is very clear regarding the status of the coastline and the citizens’ right to use it freely.

The Constitution of the Republic of Albania and the Civil Code define the coastline, the sand, and territorial waters as inalienable public property.

Law No. 107/2014 “On Territorial Planning and Development,” as amended, prohibits construction, fencing, or obstacles that violate the public interest and citizens’ free access.

Law No. 93/2015 “On Tourism,” as amended, requires the preservation of public spaces on beaches and guarantees free access to the coastline.

Regulations on beach administration establish that part of the beach must remain public and free of charge, while private entities do not have the right to block access to the sea or prevent citizens from moving freely.

Any fence, blockage, or treatment of the coastline as private property constitutes a legal violation and should carry administrative and criminal responsibility.

Therefore, protesting to defend the coastline and the law is not espionage. It is a civic right and a defense of the public interest.

This is how other European countries act, such as Italy: even in the case of Donald Trump Jr., investigations were opened and public debate arose over alleged violations in protected areas and hunting laws, showing that the law is enforced and there are no exceptions for anyone.

Meanwhile, in Albania, in sensitive areas such as Zvernec and Dalan, which are habitats for flamingos and important parts of protected ecosystems, citizens are raising concerns that the law is not being applied with the same standards and force for everyone.

Therefore, the question for the newspaper “Sot” remains: is it normal for citizens who demand the enforcement of the law to be labeled and smeared, while transparency and accountability are lacking for actions affecting public property? Should the law in Albania close its eyes when sons-in-law or relatives of American presidents seek favors or special treatment? And if such cases continue repeatedly without being stopped, what will remain of Albania?

Here is also what the historian and patriot Eleni Kocaqi writes:

“The Albanian government must urgently inform the public about who has fenced off an inalienable public space in Vlora, which is the absolute property of the Albanian people. The coastline, the seabed, riverbeds, lakes, and reservoirs, together with the water itself, are the absolute property of the people and can neither be sold, bought, nor privatized. They are for common use and belong to all the people. If the government has signed any contract, it must make it public and clearly specify what benefits the people will receive from this investment. The law does not allow the sea to be fenced off, and those responsible must bear criminal liability. The justice authorities should begin criminal proceedings on this matter.”

These are the arguments of a historian and a lawyer, but since many of us in that protest and in the “Save Vlora” initiative are from Dukat and Vlora, and have relatives, grandparents, and great-grandparents who fought and gave their lives in the struggle against Greek chauvinism, we ask these questions:

If influential foreign figures, such as Jared Kushner, are involved in major development projects in Albania, who guarantees that decision-making will not violate Albanian law and the public interest?

Is there full transparency regarding these projects and the people behind them, or does Albania risk being treated as a place where legal standards can be relativized because of names and political connections?

And the question for the newspaper “Sot” remains: is it normal for citizens demanding the enforcement of the law to be labeled and smeared, while full transparency is missing regarding decisions that affect public property?

In the end, a shared question arises for the newspaper and its readers: is this truly about full transparency regarding the real names of investors and decision-makers behind these projects, or about hidden structures of interest operating behind public figures and seeking benefits at the expense of the public interest?