Elisa Spiropali wrote over the weekend that governance has turned into a model where institutions are no longer decision-making spaces, but instruments of pressure. Also, days ago, she made a quick but rather acidic scan of the Socialist Party, as a party that has built a culture where obedience is considered a virtue and silence and adaptation are rewarded, while meritocracy is simply a word. The strongest part of the last March's stance had to do with the fact that in today's majority there is a fear of speaking out, fear of the consequences for their political careers, but also beyond, for their families, businesses or jobs.
Last week, such a thing happened to the former Speaker of the Parliament herself. The tax authorities were ordered to inspect her husband's businesses due to Spiropali's political behavior. The raid on her husband's business is an important detail to show and understand the government's reaction to her criticism, but above all to understand how seriously Elisa takes the path she has embarked on. So far, she has said that she will not remain silent, even though she has been advised to do so, even though she is aware that the real tests, with more consequences for these principled positions, are still coming. So far, she has said that she will do the opposite, and it is not that she has said little.
For many who have been denouncing this government for a long time, the phenomena that Elisa mentions are not a revelation, but stated by a socialist who until yesterday was Foreign Minister and Speaker of the Parliament, they take on value.
It is no coincidence that in the Socialist Party, nine years after Ben Blushi, who was the last to articulate a political alternative to what Rama had begun to execute, someone dares to denounce the degradation of this party and this government.
It is not a small thing, considering that the SP today resembles a military unit, where everyone raised their hand to reject SPAK's request for Belinda Balluku, going against the narrative of supporting justice and taking the cost of the first real clash with the EU since coming to power. Spiropali, although belatedly, has done this. But, beyond this not small benefit for the conditions we find ourselves in, the question that arises is where will Elisa end up with these strong denunciations?
Is this a personal battle with Belinda Balluku and is he seeking to regain lost positions? If Rama avoids Balluku, would Spiropali calm down? Is he seeking in principle the establishment of some rules that have been violated and that's it? Or is it clear that the path he has embarked on will inevitably lead him to a confrontation with Rama?
Mrs. Spiropali has the right to decide what she will do with her career, but from the scan she has made of the SP and the government, it is clear that only Edi Rama is responsible for the level of democracy, meritocracy, arrogance, silence, fear or even lawlessness in the party and government. Spiropali knows well that the order for the controls on her husband's businesses may have been given by Belinda Balluku, but not without the permission of the Prime Minister, just as she knows equally well that it was Rama who dismissed her from the post of Foreign Minister.
Spiropali is clear that after his absence from the vote on Balluk's immunity, he caused the latter's revenge, but it was Rama who demanded that no vote of the SP group be against Balluk and it was Rama who removed him from the leadership of the Tirana district, delegating him to Unit 2.
Therefore, more than denunciations, personal ability or moral superiority, in the created situation it is important that Elisa is clear that her battle is with Edi Rama and, even more important, it is important that she has the will to fight this battle. If she does not, it would simply remain a personal grudge or female rivalry.
**This article is part of the 'PRODEMOCRATIA' project, a partnership between the PASHKO INSTITUTE and MAPO media, to analyze the developments of Albanian democracy.
