The fires that have engulfed different areas of the country are reviving not only alarm over the damage on the ground, but also suspicions about the interests that may lie behind them. Former Socialist Party MP Marjana Koçeku has voiced strong accusations over the latest cases in Krujë, suggesting that in Albania fire has often been used as an instrument for political and economic interests.
Suspicions raised over the Krujë area
Koçeku focused on the area behind the cement factory in Krujë, where several large quarries are located and where several fire hotspots have been recorded in recent days. According to her, the fact that some of these hotspots remain active raises serious questions about how the territory is being managed.
At the core of her reaction is the suspicion that these episodes cannot be seen simply as isolated events, but as part of a reality in which land, forests and land use remain exposed to strong economic interests.
Claim of a political and economic background
According to Koçeku, in some cases fires may serve to clear the way for later developments, legal facilitation or encroachments that under normal conditions would have had a harder time getting through. She presents fire as a means of pressure on the territory, not simply as a result of negligence or high temperatures.
In this context, she also cited Pishë-Poro as an example, where, according to her claim, the fire continued for days and caused extensive burning without proper intervention.
Accusation of lack of control over land and forests
Another point she raised concerns the unclear administration of forest land. According to Koçeku, the lack of a clear line of responsibility turns the territory into a space where no one truly bears the burden of protection, while many see only the possibility of profit.
This is a problem that goes beyond the fire emergency and affects the way institutions have left property, forests and the boundaries of responsibility in administrative fog. When land is perceived as “belonging to no one,” the ground for abuse expands and a timely response is weakened.
Criticism also of territorial reforms
Koçeku also links this situation to the territorial interventions of recent years, arguing that the removal of powers from the local level has weakened communities’ connection to the territory. According to her, when decision-making is moved away from the people of the area, the sense of belonging and responsibility for protecting the place also fades.
In her assessment, this turns the relationship between the community and the territory into a purely bureaucratic one, while on the ground an institutional vacuum remains that favors damage, exploitation and speculation.
The former MP’s statements level serious accusations over an issue where, until now, public responsibility has often dissolved into justifications about temperatures, wind or carelessness. Her claims are not accompanied by official evidence at this stage, but they bring back to the center the essential question: who benefits when the territory burns, and why does the state continue to appear weaker in protection than the interests waiting behind the fire?