The effects of property laws on the process of restitution and compensation in post-communist Albania, under the framework of transitional justice. in respect of transitional justice, that restitution in addition to the material side is needed to restore dignity and to reinstate victims as full participants in the social, political and economic life of the community.42 However, with regard to this treatment, it should be noted that the issue of restitution and compensation has had other points of view when it comes to dealing with the concept and the issue. According to Article 2643 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights44, restitution is regarded as an affirmation of discrimination (according to the content of this article), as discrimination of an old regime that is still going on.45 In 200446, the new law “On the restitution and compensation of property”47 was adopted. 48 It repealed the 1993 law. This law brought some innovations and resembled a more “advanced” law than the 1993 law. It already included in its content the public interest, fair remuneration and expanded means of property compensation. For the first time the Albanian state was seeking to establish a compensation fund and the restitution of property was not limited in size. The compensation law, introduced in 2004, which specifically targeted compensation for expropriations made after 1944, made the compensation process even more confusing.49 Although the adoption of the new law was welcomed, its implementation has received widespread criticism.50 Incomplete legislation, unstable case laws and a lack of coherence made this process not only delayed, but also failed to deliver the required results. The need to give a final settlement to the landlord’s report on the expropriated property led to the drafting and adoption of Law 133/2015, which undertakes to give a final settlement, within the time limits set out in this law, to the compensation of former owners.51 Referring to the ECHR, the Case of “Manushaqe Puto etc. vs. Albania” and the recommendations of this Court, Law 133/2015 was adopted creating a compensation mechanism that will strike a fair balance between the rights of former providers and the public interest.52 According to the 2016 Venice Commission Report, the existence of an up-to-date legal framework for return and compensation53 beyond bad administrative practices 42. Tom Allen, Restitution and Transitional Justice in the European Court of Human Rights. (2006). 9 43. Article 26 “All persons are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to the equal protection of the law. In this respect, the law shall prohibit any discrimination and guarantee to all persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on any ground such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.” 44. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966 entry into force 23 March 1976, in accordance with Article 49. https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/ccpr.aspx 45. Tom Allen, “Restitution and Transitional Justice in the European Court of Human Rights”.(2006). 25 46. This law has been subjected several times to the constitutionality test by the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Albania, respectively under Decision no. 26/2005 on the repeal as unconstitutional of Article 9 of Law No. 9235, dated 29.07.2004, “On Restitution and Compensation of Property”; Decision no.30 / 2005 on the repeal as incompatible with the Constitution of the Republic of Albania of Articles 3.2, 3.5, 5, 6.1, 6.2, 7, 8.2, 8.3, 8.4, 9 and 13.2 of Law no. 9235, dated 29.07.2004 “On restitution and compensation of property”; Decision no. 43/2011 on the repeal, as incompatible with the Constitution of the Republic of Albania, of Law No. 10308, amending Law No. 9235 “On Restitution and Compensation of Property”. 47. Law 9235/2004 “On the restitution and compensation of property” 48. “Parliament passed a bill in 2004 on property restitution and compensation for pre-Communist property owners. The opposition did not take part in the vote.” Freedom House.Report for Albania.2005 https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2005/albania. 49. European Parliament. Directorate-General For Internal Policies. Policy Department.Citizens’Rights and Constitutional Affairs. Private properties issues following the change of political regime in former socialist or communist countries: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Romania and Serbia.Study.(2010) 35. 50. European Parliament. Directorate-General For Internal Policies. Policy Department.Citizens’Rights and Constitutional Affairs. Private properties issues following the change of political regime in former socialist or communist countries: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Romania and Serbia. Study. (2010).35 51. https://rm.coe.int/commentary-on-law-on-treatment-of-property-alb-/168094784a 52. The authorities were forced, in the context of a European Court pilot decision, to establish a mechanism for the restitution and compensation of property, which should ensure: the avoidance of constant legislative changes; the making of accurate and reliable information available and carefully analyze all legal and financial implications; the creation of satisfactory remedies and avoid unfavorable procedural criteria; complete transparency and effectiveness in the decision-making process; realistic mandatory legal deadlines and sufficient financial and human resources; the increase of the burden on illegal owners seeking to legalize property rights on former-owners and state-owned properties; the establishment of a transparent and effective system of real estate registration; extensive public discussions. 53. European Commission for democracy through law (Venice Commission). Albania. Law no.133/2915 “On the treatment of property and finalization of the process of compensation of property and explanatory memorandum and report on the law (Explanatory report). Opinion NO.861/2016. Strasbourg, 4 August 2016. 13