32 The Unfinished Business of rT ansitional Justice: Reparation of oF rmer Political Prisoners in Post-Communist Albania Victims are considered to be at the center of a successful transitional justice program.7 Since TJ is focused on using justice mechanisms to address the past linking directly and explicitly actions with addressing injustice caused to victims. Reparations of victims are a key element of TJ aiming to relieve the suffering of and affording justice to victims by removing or redressing to the extent possible the consequences of the wrongful acts and by preventing and deterring violations. Additionally, reparation also has a broader socio-political role in demonstrating a state has acknowledged past violations and is committed to ensuring they are not repeated.8 In this study, I try to give voice to victims as a neglected category by focusing on the reparation of political prisoners in post-communist Albania. The research aims to assess reparation measures taken by the Albanian government from 1991 until now looking at them from the perspective of victims. Specifically, this research tries to respond to the questions: What are the victim’s needs? How have those needs been impacted by measures taken to date? and What are the policy requirements to address those needs? The paper analyses the role that issues raised by victims themselves during the interviews paly in reparation such as financial compensation, access to files, apology and forgiveness, justice and socio-political empowerment in healing former political prisoners. Reparations measure in Albania were designed to give importance to material compensation to the victims. However, in this paper, I argue that reparations are also about the acknowledgment of what has happened, the responsibility for it by state and perpetrators and the establishment of the truth. Victims in TJ: A review Legal framework The right to a remedy and reparation for violations of human rights is set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights9, the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights10, and several key regional agreements such as the European Convention on Human Rights11. International human rights law has progressively recognized the right of victims of human rights violations to pursue their claims for redress and reparation before national justice mechanisms and, if need be, before international forums.12 However, despite the duty of states under international law to repair gross violations and address victim’s human rights implementing this right and states corresponding duty is, in essence, a matter of domestic law and policy. To guide states in fulfilling this duty United Nations (UN) has adopted the Basic Principles and Guidelines13 widely known as the van Boven Principles serving as a tool for victim-oriented policies and practices.14 The basic principles and guidelines establish reparation as a necessary measure under international human rights law. They offer a categorization of reparations measures in five forms:15 7. Guidance Note of the Secretary-General, United Nations Approach to Transitional Justice (UN, 2010) 8. See further: Simon Robins, ‘Failing Victims? The Limits of Transitional Justice in Addressing the Needs of Victims of Violations’ (2017) 11 HR&ILD 1; Ernesto Verdeja, ‘Reparations in Democratic Transition’ (2006) Res Pulica 12 9. Article 8, Universal Declaration of Human Rights 10. Article 2, International Convention on Civil and Political Rights 11. Article 13, European Convention on Human Rights 12. See “Promoting the Right to Reparation for Survivors of Torture: What Role for a Permanent International Criminal Court?”(Redress, 1997) 13-19 13. UNGA, Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law (Doc A/RES/60/147, 2006) 14. UN, Rule-Of-Law Tools for Post-Conflict States: Reparations Programmes (2008) 15. UN Basic Principles and Guidelines