Transparent, Incorruptible—and Unaccountable? Inside Albania’s AI Minister

In September 2025, Albania made global headlines by unveiling a first-of-its-kind announcement: Diella, an AI-generated avatar dressed in a traditional Zadrimë costume, addressing parliament as the country’s new “minister” of public procurement.

Prime Minister Edi Rama, now in his fourth term, presented Diella as “transparent, incorruptible, and constitutional”—a technological salve for one of Albania’s most corruption-scarred sectors. “Diella never sleeps, she doesn’t need to be paid, she has no personal interests,” Rama declared. This was met with criticism from the opposition Democratic Party, which called the move “ridiculous” and “unconstitutional.”But beyond the spectacle lies a core tension: Albania’s AI experiment promises alignment with European Union standards while simultaneously raising questions about democratic accountability in a country where institutions remain fragile.

Albania’s sprint toward EU membership by 2030 has amplified incentives to showcase rapid modernization. The European Commission’s 2025 Progress Report notes significant progress—opening four negotiating clusters and fulfilling 21 reform measures—yet identifies substantial shortcomings: abuse of public resources, uneven competition, and interference in the judicial system. Public procurement—long flagged as vulnerable to clientelism—sits at the centre of these concerns. In this context, Rama’s appointment of an AI minister is strategic: a technological shortcut to “EU-proofing” bureaucratic processes without confronting the harder work of deeper systemic reform.

Importantly, Albania’s digital governance ambitions long predate Diella. The e-Albania platform, launched years ago, consolidated government services online, reducing face-to-face encounters with bureaucrats to cut corruption. Diella, which means “Sun” in Albanian, emerged from this platform and initially functioned as a virtual assistant for citizens navigating government services. Her elevation to ministerial status, however, marks a significant leap—from helper to decision-maker in a sector worth billions. It is also unfolding in a government long marked by procurement scandals, especially in construction and infrastructure. This positions Diella as incorruptible precisely where mistrust runs deepest, while insulating the state politically. 

External pressures reinforce this logic, as the EU’s central demand for accession has been straightforward: address corruption. As anti-corruption expert Dr. Andi Hoxhaj of King’s College London states, “If [Diella] is a vehicle or mechanism that could be used towards that goal, it’s worth exploring.” AI-driven procurement, after all, promises standardized processes that limit patronage networks and constrain human discretion—exactly the kind of reforms Brussels closely monitors. The EU’s 2024 Artificial Intelligence Act treats public-sector decision tools as “high-risk,” requiring human oversight, fundamental rights assessments, and transparency. Albania is not yet legally bound by these rules, but aligning with them signals commitment to “smart governance” norms.

The prospect is therefore appealing. AI could raise the baseline of administrative integrity, reduce opportunities for elite capture, and position Albania as a regional test case for digital governance—potentially influencing Montenegro, Serbia, Bosnia, and North Macedonia, all grappling with similar challenges. Countries like Estonia and France have integrated the digital age into governance (the latter through its “start-up nation” rhetoric), though crucially, these nations count on robust institutions and legal safeguards placed under EU frameworks. It is here where Albania’s experiment diverges: it adopts the symbol—the avatar—without those institutional requisites.

It’s worth noting that procurement will not be exclusively delegated to Diella. Enio Kaso, director of AI at Albania’s National Agency for Information Society, explains that the system—developed in collaboration with Microsoft by fine-tuning OpenAI’s GPT model—will operate at four key stages with human experts signing off at each point: drafting contract terms, specifying eligibility criteria, setting price limits, and verifying documents. Yet, here is where accountability blurs. When a losing bidder challenges an award, who is accountable? The prime minister, the supervising official, the vendor behind the model, or no one at all? The Albanian government has not fully explained how accountability will be handled.

That is the core paradox. Diella, and AI in general, is commonly framed as “incorruptible,” but governance—especially democratic—is not merely procedural. It requires judgment, contestation, transparency, and responsibility. Most importantly, it requires that decisions carry accountability, and an AI cannot be impeached. Diella herself addressed critics in a video statement, asserting: “The Constitution speaks of duties, responsibilities, transparency, and service. It does not speak of chromosomes, flesh, or blood.” She argued that “the real threat to constitutions has never been machines, but the inhuman decisions of men with power.” Though effective, this rhetoric evades the fact that Albania’s institutional ecosystem remains fundamentally weak. 

Those weaknesses are documented. Freedom House’sNations in Transit 2024 scores the country at 3.79 out of 7, classifying it as a “transitional/hybrid regime.” Moreover, Transparency International’s 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index places Albania at 42 out of 100, among Europe’s lowest. These metrics reflect an institutional ecosystem that still lacks the capacity to audit algorithmic outputs and offers no clear appeals mechanism for AI-influenced decisions. Political elites may quietly shape the model’s parameters while publicly claiming that “the algorithm decided.” The danger, then, is not simply technical opacity but democratic hollowing, with the chain of accountability dissolving into datasets and executive directives. 

Two realities can coexist. Algorithmic procurement can reduce abuses, but it can also introduce new ones. If government staff or vendors quietly adjust how bids are scored, or if training data carries embedded bias, the process won’t be fairer—it will simply hide problems behind a digital façade. As Columbia University’s Data Science Institute warned, “Ensuring that the design and use of [AI] tools reflect citizens’ values and the public interest is vital to preserving…democratic accountability”. Here, the EU accession protocols will be tested. As the Diella experiment sends a sharp signal across the Balkans and beyond—that AI can function as a performance of modernization without strengthening the rule of law—Brussels will have to respond. 

Overall, Albania’s AI minister illustrates a tension facing democracies worldwide: how to harness AI’s benefits without losing accountability. As much as it increases efficiency, efficiency is not accountability. Citizens value reduced bureaucratic friction, but if tenders are allocated unfairly and no one can be held responsible, institutional trust will erode. The success of Diella will thus depend not on the sophistication of her algorithms but on the quality of governance surrounding them. 

If Europe’s future is digital, the challenge won’t be building an incorruptible bureaucracy—but ensuring that digital states remain democratic ones. AI can enhance governance, but it cannot replace institutional trust, civic participation, or democratic deliberation. As Albania races to modernize faster than its institutions can adapt to, the world will be watching. Will Diella become a cautionary tale about the perils of automating power without democratizing it?

Edited by Shumyle Eman Shahid

Featured image: Photo of Diella, courtesy of the Albanian government.