Jorida Tabaku accuses the government: KAYO and other institutions, part of an ‘archipelago of illegality’ built by Rama

Democratic Party MP Jorida Tabaku has raised accusations of a lack of transparency and control in some state structures, mentioning KAYO, the Albanian Development Bank and the Albanian Investment Corporation.

According to her, these structures are part of an economic model where the risk remains public, while decision-making is concentrated in few hands.

Tabaku describes KAYO as one of the ‘islands’ of this system, raising questions about how private partners are selected and about control over costs, conflicts of interest and ultimate beneficiaries.

She stresses that the fact that this is a strategic sector should not be used as an argument for the lack of financial transparency.

“State secrecy cannot be turned into financial secrecy. Security cannot be used as a curtain to hide how citizens’ money is spent,” Tabaku declares.

Besides KAYO, Tabaku also calls the Albanian Development Bank an ‘island’. She acknowledges that Albania needs more financing for agriculture, small businesses and sectors that have difficulty accessing credit, but emphasizes that independent control and transparency are needed over how beneficiaries are selected.

The Albanian Investment Corporation is also in her focus. The MP also refers to the findings of the Supreme State Audit Institution, mentioning problems in project planning, a lack of standardized methodologies for selecting and managing projects, incomplete risk and profitability analyses, as well as a loan of 2 billion lek that was not repaid within the initial deadline.

“The Supreme State Audit Institution, in its audit, has identified insufficient planning, a lack of standardized methodologies for selecting and managing projects, incomplete risk and profitability analyses, as well as a loan of 2 billion lek that was not repaid within the initial deadline. These are not political labels. They are findings that require answers. How many projects have been completed? How many sustainable jobs have been created? How much revenue has the state received? How were public properties valued? Who is held accountable when consultancies are paid but the project does not move forward? Where is the analysis proving that the citizen gains more than they lose?” Tabaku says.

Jorida Tabaku:

In this weekend corner, I want us to talk about something that at first glance seems far from our daily lives: agencies, corporations and state-owned companies with big names, boards, directors and statutes. But in reality, this topic is very close to every Albanian family, because it is linked to the bill we pay at the end of the month, to the price of food, to school books and supplies for our children, to a salary that is not enough, to the taxes we pay and the services we do not receive. A new economic reality has been created on Albania’s map: several institutions that look like separate islands, but that, when seen together, form an entire archipelago of illegality, lack of transparency and uncontrolled power. One island is called KAYO. Another is called the Albanian Development Bank. Another is called the Albanian Investment Corporation. The names change, the fields change, but the model remains the same: the money is public, the assets are public, the risk is public, while decision-making is concentrated in few hands and control is weakened. This is the heart of the problem, and this is the economy of the few, whose bill is paid by the many.

This system was not built overnight. It was constructed step by step over these thirteen years. It began with micromanaging tenders, concessions and public-private partnerships. From the smallest purchases to the largest contracts in healthcare, energy or waste treatment, the idea took hold that having the best offer is not enough; you have to be close to power. Honest entrepreneurs began to understand that work, ideas and investment are not enough when the result is decided by political connections. Then the system evolved. It was no longer enough to control a tender. Special structures were created, with special laws and special exemptions. Islands where the ordinary rules of the state are partly applied, where Parliament sees less, the public knows less and the government decides more. Today we are not facing isolated cases. We have an architecture.

Let us look at the first island: KAYO. KAYO was created as a state-owned company and, in a very short time, became part of a series of joint ventures with private companies. These partnerships involve the production of vehicles, uniforms, ammunition and military technologies. So we have public funds, state property, contracts in a strategic sector and private partners. Then the questions are unavoidable: How was each partner selected? What competition was held? How was their experience assessed? Who controls the costs? Who verifies conflicts of interest? Where are the contracts and ultimate beneficiaries published? What responsibility does the board bear for every euro spent? These questions do not harm national security. On the contrary, they protect it. State secrecy cannot be turned into financial secrecy. Security cannot be used as a curtain to hide how citizens’ money is spent. We do not oppose Albanian production. We oppose the privatization of profit and the nationalization of risk. We oppose a model where the private partner takes the contract, while the citizen bears the bill if the project fails.

The second island is the Albanian Development Bank. Here too we must be clear: Albania needs more financing for agriculture, small enterprises and sectors that commercial banks support little. The idea of a development bank, in itself, is not wrong. The problem is who controls it, how beneficiaries are selected and who pays when loans are not repaid. The law provides for external audit and a role for the Bank of Albania in supervising savings products collected through an entity of the Albanian Post, as well as for statistical reporting. But this is not the same as the full, ordinary supervision exercised over a commercial bank. In other words, the government is the shareholder, the government chooses the management, the government sets the priorities and the report goes back to the government. This is exactly where the need for genuinely independent control arises, because a development bank can be an engine for entrepreneurship, but without professional filters it can turn into a counter for political clients. It can finance the farmer who produces or the friend who calls. It can help the business with ideas or the business with connections. That is why we demand that every large loan, every state guarantee, every beneficiary and every fiscal exposure be checkable and, when there is no legal obstacle, public. Development is not afraid of transparency. Only favor is afraid of it.

The third island is the Albanian Investment Corporation. Here the contrast is startling. A municipality, a school or an institution cannot even buy a box of pens without a procedure. But when we talk about land, buildings and public assets worth millions of euros, the standard becomes murkier. Assets are transferred to a corporation and decision-making is concentrated in a structure far less visible to the citizen. The question is simple: Why is transparency smaller as the value grows larger? The Supreme State Audit Institution, in its audit, has identified insufficient planning, a lack of standardized methodologies for selecting and managing projects, incomplete risk and profitability analyses, as well as a loan of 2 billion lek that was not repaid within the initial deadline. These are not political labels. They are findings that require answers. How many projects have been completed? How many sustainable jobs have been created? How much revenue has the state received? How were public properties valued? Who is held accountable when consultancies are paid but the project does not move forward? Where is the analysis proving that the citizen gains more than they lose?

The ‘Durana Tech Park’ project must also be viewed by this standard. Innovation is essential. Fiscal facilities can make sense when they bring new investment, technology and quality employment. But when companies receive fiscal privileges, citizens have the right to know the criteria, the cost to the budget and the real result on the ground. These three islands are not disconnected. They are linked by the same bridges: special laws, concentrated decision-making, restricted competition, insufficient control and risk that ends up with the taxpayer. And this is why this issue directly affects the cost of living. When the state chooses favor instead of competition, it pays more for the same good or service. When business without connections is excluded, the market loses operators and competition weakens. When a state-owned enterprise has free land, public guarantees and contracts from the state, the private entrepreneur no longer competes on equal terms.

Corruption is not an abstract concept. Corruption is a hidden tax on every family. We pay it in the price, in the missing service and in the lost opportunity. This is why an economy can grow in statistics, while a family feels poorer. What should be done? First, every contract, partnership and transfer of public assets must be made public, together with the selection criteria, the economic assessment and the ultimate beneficiaries. Second, every state-owned company that uses public funds, property or guarantees must be subject to full control by Parliament, the Supreme State Audit Institution and other independent institutions. Third, boards and managers must bear personal responsibility for every decision, every contract and every euro spent. Fourth, real and equal competition must be restored. An entrepreneur should win through work, ideas and ability, not through connections to power.

We cannot build a strong economy on islands of exemptions. We cannot have one law for the citizen and another for the privileged. We cannot demand every receipt and every document from small businesses, while billions of euros pass through structures where transparency is minimal. We cannot talk about European integration while creating institutions that move away from European standards of competition, control and accountability. Albania needs institutions that serve the public, not structures that protect power. It needs an economy that rewards work, not political proximity. It needs a state that protects the taxpayer, not a state that passes on to him the bill for failures and abuses.

These three islands are only part of a much larger archipelago. An archipelago built on special laws, closed contracts, favors and a lack of control. An archipelago that is damaging competition, weakening the economy and making life harder for every Albanian family. This system does not change by removing some people and bringing in others. The way of governing itself must change. Our goal is not to replace one group with another, but governance for Albania and for its citizens. This system must be changed. Not to replace the clients of one party with the clients of another party, but to put an end to clientelism itself. Not to change the names on offices, but to change the rules inside them.

Albanians deserve a state that is accountable. They deserve an economy that works for the majority and not for the few. They deserve for their taxes to be used for schools, hospitals, roads and services, not for closed structures and privileged interests. We will fight to dismantle this archipelago of impunity and to build a continent of equal laws, controlled institutions and opportunities for all. Because Albania is not the property of power. Albania belongs to its citizens. And its economy must work for the majority, not for the few.