A day after the closed-door meeting of the Socialist Party parliamentary group, Erion Braçe has spoken publicly to challenge the versions that circulated about what happened in the room. The Socialist MP says he was not thrown out by anyone, but left on his own because, according to him, there was nothing more for him to hear.
Braçe denies being forced out of the meeting
In the reaction published on social media, Braçe rejects the speculation that he was expelled or thrown out of the Socialist Party parliamentary group meeting.
He says he remained in the room, said what he had to say, and then left by his own decision. According to him, this is the truth of the episode that was commented on after the meeting.
Accusation of distorting what was said in the room
Braçe claims that before speaking, he had asked those present not to report anything from his remarks outside the room. However, according to him, the opposite happened.
The Socialist MP says his words were later transformed in public, describing this as an ordered political attack. His claim raises questions about how information emerges and is recycled from meetings officially presented as closed.
What exactly the Socialist MP said
In his message, Braçe wrote: “Yesterday, no one threw me out. I sat down because I had nothing more to say, after I had said there, and in the previous meeting, everything that Socialists have been saying for 1 year. I went outside on my own because I had nothing more to hear. This is the truth.”
His statement comes after the Socialist Party group meeting was accompanied by interpretations and speculation about internal tensions, which have not been fully clarified officially.
Closed meetings and the lack of transparency
The case brings renewed attention to a recurring problem in Albanian politics: the more closed a political forum is, the more space is created for unclear versions, selective leaks, and the use of information according to the interest of the moment.
In the absence of a full institutional clarification from the leaders of the parliamentary group, the debate remains dependent on individual statements and on the interpretations produced outside the room.
For now, Braçe’s reaction remains the most direct public version from inside that meeting.
What seems clear is that even a closed meeting of the majority has produced more noise than clarity.