Call on RIBA to Review Edi Rama’s Honorary Fellowship
The Issue
Architecture must serve people and planet — not power.
On 12 March 2026, the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) named Albanian Prime Minister Edi Rama an Honorary Fellow. RIBA describes Honorary Fellowship as recognising people who have made a significant contribution to architecture and the built environment, including people who help influence its delivery in a more sustainable way and nurture the interests of future generations. (Reference 1-2)
We are therefore asking RIBA a simple but serious question:
Is retaining Edi Rama’s Honorary Fellowship compatible with those principles in light of documented European institutional concerns about Albania’s environmental protections, and publicly stated accounts raising questions about the relationship between political authority and architectural planning? (Reference 4-9)
We, the undersigned, call on RIBA to accept a complaint under its applicable Disciplinary Rules or, if RIBA considers these matters potentially serious and/or in the public interest, initiate its own Complaint under Rule 2.10; examine the evidence fairly; provide Edi Rama an opportunity to respond; publish a reasoned conclusion to the fullest extent consistent with due process; and revoke the Honorary Fellowship if the applicable evidence and standards justify that sanction. (Reference 2-3)
This petition concerns accountability
This petition is not directed against Albania, architecture, tourism, investment, development or any political party. It concerns the standards that should govern decisions affecting the built and natural environment.
Architectural and development projects should advance through transparent institutions, equal rules, environmental safeguards, technical scrutiny and meaningful public participation. Professional recognition should be consistent with those principles, particularly where the recipient is a serving political leader whose public authority influences planning and development. (Reference 2-4-5)
Architecture should succeed because it survives a fair, transparent and accountable process.
Not because it has found the right political door.
Evidence concerning architecture and political authority
Architect Peter L. Wilson of BOLLES+WILSON has publicly discussed his experience of working in Albania. In an account reported by architecture publication Archined in connection with The Albanian Calls, Wilson described what he regarded as two parallel approaches to obtaining planning permission: an ordinary route involving planning regulations and institutional procedures, and another involving direct access to Prime Minister Edi Rama.
Wilson is quoted as stating:
“If Edi likes it, then it gets a permit.” (Reference 6)
These are Peter L. Wilson’s statements. This petition does not present them as independently established facts. A recorded or published statement is evidence that the statement was made; it is not, by itself, proof that any particular permit was unlawful, that formal procedures were bypassed, or that any individual acted improperly.
The statements nevertheless raise a question that falls squarely within the public responsibilities of architecture and planning. If political approval can in practice become more important than ordinary planning procedures, technical scrutiny, environmental assessment or institutional review, RIBA should examine the professional significance of that claim, together with any evidence supporting or contradicting it. (Reference 3-6)
The issue is not architectural taste.
It is whether institutions, rules and professional scrutiny remain decisive when major political and development interests are involved.
European institutions have raised serious concerns about environmental governance (Reference 4)
The European Commission’s 2025 Albania Report identified substantial shortcomings in Albania’s environmental governance and its alignment with EU environmental standards.
Under Chapter 27 — Environment and Climate Change, the Commission stated that Albania needed significantly to improve the alignment and implementation of environmental legislation, particularly the Environmental Impact Assessment and Strategic Environmental Assessment Directives. It identified weak institutional capacity for coordinated environmental planning, poor-quality environmental impact assessments, recommendations that were rarely implemented or monitored, low public participation in decision-making and limited enforcement.
The Commission also concluded that the 2024 amendments to Albania’s Law on Protected Areas had weakened protection, while inspection and enforcement capacity had deteriorated, particularly in relation to environmental crime in protected areas. It stated that environmental monitoring and administrative capacity needed strengthening to meet EU standards.
On nature protection specifically, the Commission found that alignment with the EU Birds and Habitats Directives required further improvement and stated that the 2024 amendments had resulted in a deterioration in nature protection. It also raised concerns about continued development and investment pressure affecting protected areas.
The report further noted that construction of the new Vlora Airport within the Pishë Poro-Narta Protected Area was continuing despite requests made by the Standing Committee of the Bern Convention in December 2023 and December 2024 to suspend the works until a new and sufficient environmental impact assessment procedure had been conducted.
These findings concern matters central to the responsibilities of architecture and development: environmental assessment, planning, institutional capacity, monitoring, enforcement, public participation and the integrity of protected areas.
The European Parliament called for stronger action (Reference 5)
On 17 June 2026, the European Parliament adopted its resolution concerning the European Commission’s 2025 Albania Report by 483 votes in favour, 103 against and 70 abstentions.
The adopted resolution expressed serious concern about developments within the Vjosa-Narta protected area and called on the Albanian authorities to establish an immediate moratorium on new permitting procedures, construction works and development interventions within protected areas until provisions of the amended Protected Areas legislation incompatible with EU nature-protection standards are repealed and full compliance with those standards is ensured. It also called for projects in the area to undergo comprehensive environmental impact assessment in line with EU standards, including transparent public participation involving local communities, scientists and civil society.
These are not simply objections raised by individual campaigners. They form part of the formal institutional discussion surrounding Albania’s European integration and the implementation of the EU environmental acquis, including Chapter 27 on environment and climate change.
An architectural institution that confers an honour on a serving political leader for his contribution to architecture and the built environment should be prepared to examine whether these documented concerns have relevance to the values represented by that honour.
The significance of Vjosa-Narta (Reference 7-9)
Vjosa-Narta is a protected coastal landscape of exceptional ecological importance.
The area includes lagoons, wetlands, coastal forest and other important habitats and forms a major stopover area on the Adriatic Flyway for birds migrating between Europe and Africa. BirdLife International reports that the area supports more than 200 bird species and more than 70 species it describes as endangered.
The Flamingo has become a public symbol of efforts to defend Vjosa-Narta, but the significance of the landscape extends far beyond one species. BirdLife International, PPNEA — Protection and Preservation of Natural Environment in Albania, EuroNatur, scientists and other civil-society organisations have repeatedly raised concerns about development and infrastructure pressure affecting the area.
The concerns surrounding Vjosa-Narta have also reached international institutions. The Bern Convention has scrutinised infrastructure development affecting the area, while the European Commission subsequently recorded the Standing Committee’s requests to suspend construction of Vlora Airport pending a new and sufficient environmental impact assessment.
Vjosa-Narta therefore raises a direct question about the credibility of protected-area status:
When major development is proposed in or affecting a protected landscape, does “protected” continue to mean protected?
The authorities should be able to demonstrate compliance with environmental law through transparent permitting, adequate environmental assessment, independent scrutiny, effective enforcement and meaningful public participation.
Environmental protection cannot depend on the scale, prestige or financial importance of the proposed investment.
RIBA should apply its own standards
This petition does not ask RIBA to invent a new ethical standard.
It asks RIBA to apply the standards and procedures it already publishes.
RIBA states that Honorary Fellowship is a category of RIBA membership and that Honorary Fellows are subject to Byelaw 5 ‘Conduct’, including the RIBA Code of Conduct. RIBA describes its Code as being based on the principles of Integrity, Competence and Relationships, alongside concern for others and for the environment.
RIBA also states that members should promote and protect the public interest while taking account of future generations, and should strive to protect and enhance heritage and the natural environment.
RIBA appropriately notes that conduct outside the practice of architecture may not necessarily fall within the remit of the Code. However, it also states that where a complaint concerning the professional behaviour of an Honorary Fellow potentially offends against the honour, integrity or reputation of architecture or RIBA membership, its disciplinary procedures apply. If an Honorary Fellow is found to be in breach of Byelaw 5, available sanctions may include expulsion from membership and revocation of the title Honorary Fellow.
RIBA’s March 2025 Disciplinary Rules provide that complaints concerning conduct potentially offending against Byelaw 5 may be investigated where the required criteria and evidential threshold are met. They also provide, under Rule 2.10, that where a matter concerning a member comes to RIBA’s attention from any source and RIBA considers it potentially serious and/or in the public interest, RIBA may initiate a Complaint itself.
Byelaw 5 also protects due process by providing that a member against whom a charge is made has the right to be heard, either personally or through a representative.
That framework makes the matters raised by this petition appropriate for RIBA to consider and determine, without prejudging their outcome.
If an honorary title represents the values of the institution that awards it, that institution should also be prepared to examine whether continued possession of the honour remains compatible with those values when substantial evidence and documented institutional concerns arise.
Prestige cannot replace procedure.
Investment cannot replace accountability.
Political approval cannot replace independent institutions.
Architectural ambition cannot justify weakened environmental protection.
What we ask RIBA to do
We call upon the Royal Institute of British Architects to:
- Accept a complaint under RIBA’s applicable Disciplinary Rules or, if RIBA considers these matters potentially serious and/or in the public interest, initiate its own Complaint under Rule 2.10, having regard to Byelaw 5, concerning whether Edi Rama’s continued Honorary Fellowship remains compatible with the standards applicable to that honour.
- Examine the relevant evidence fairly and independently, including:
- Peter L. Wilson’s publicly documented account of working in Albania;
- the European Commission’s 2025 Albania Report and its findings concerning environmental assessment, public participation, enforcement and protected areas;
- the European Parliament’s resolution adopted on 17 June 2026;
- Albania’s Protected Areas legislation and its implementation;
- the circumstances and environmental assessment issues concerning Vlora Airport and Vjosa-Narta;
- relevant findings and recommendations of the Bern Convention;
- evidence submitted by BirdLife International, PPNEA and other environmental organisations;
- evidence from independent architects, planners, environmental experts, scientists, local communities and civil-society organisations;
- and any relevant evidence, explanation or response supplied by Edi Rama, the Albanian Government or other competent Albanian authorities.
- Provide Edi Rama a fair opportunity to respond to the matters raised and to submit evidence in support of his position.
- Determine whether the matters raised fall within RIBA’s applicable disciplinary and governance framework, including Byelaw 5 and the provisions applicable to Honorary Fellows.
- Publish a reasoned conclusion, to the fullest extent permitted by RIBA’s procedures and legitimate confidentiality requirements, explaining how its decision is consistent with its commitments to integrity, sustainability, environmental responsibility, public interest and future generations.
- Revoke Edi Rama’s Honorary Fellowship if, following a fair review or disciplinary process, RIBA concludes that the applicable threshold for that sanction has been met or that continued retention of the honour cannot be reconciled with the standards governing Honorary Fellowship.
We do not ask RIBA to assume that the claims raised in this petition are proved.
We ask RIBA to examine them.
This is bigger than one politician
The question raised by this petition is larger than Edi Rama. It concerns what the architectural profession chooses to recognise, legitimise and reward. Architecture can transform cities, create opportunity and improve people’s lives, but it also operates alongside enormous political, financial and institutional power. That is precisely why professional institutions should defend transparent planning, independent scrutiny, environmental protection and meaningful public participation.
Development and architectural ambition are not substitutes for accountable institutions. No person should stand above the planning process. No investment should stand above environmental law. No honorary title should stand above accountability. The credibility of professional recognition depends not only on whom an institution chooses to honour, but also on whether it is willing to examine that honour when substantial evidence and documented institutional concerns raise questions about compatibility with its stated principles.
Sign the petition
Ask RIBA to examine the evidence.
Ask RIBA to listen to architects, planners, scientists, citizens, environmental organisations, local communities, European institutions and all relevant parties.
Ask RIBA to give those concerned, including Edi Rama, a fair opportunity to be heard.
Ask RIBA to determine the facts and their professional significance independently.
And ask RIBA to apply its own standards regardless of political status, influence or prestige.
Architectural excellence cannot be separated from integrity, accountability, environmental responsibility and responsibility to future generations.
Architecture must serve people and planet — not power.
Flamingo Revolution Diaspora
For nature. For transparency. For accountable institutions. For future generations.
References
- RIBA — Edi Rama’s appointment as an Honorary Fellow, announced 12 March 2026. RIBA’s announcement lists “Edi Rama, Prime Minister of Albania” among its 2026 Honorary Fellows.
RIBA — RIBA announces 27 new Honorary Fellows - RIBA — Honorary Fellows, Byelaw 5 and possible revocation. RIBA states that Honorary Fellows are RIBA members subject to Byelaw 5 and the Code of Conduct. It expressly states that sanctions can include expulsion and revocation of the title Honorary Fellow.
RIBA — Honorary Fellows and Code of Conduct - RIBA — Disciplinary Rules, including Rule 2.10. Rule 2.10 states that RIBA may itself initiate a complaint where a matter concerning a member comes to its attention and RIBA considers it potentially serious and/or in the public interest.
RIBA — Disciplinary Rules, March 2025 PDF - European Commission — Albania Report 2025. This is the principal official EU source for the petition’s claims concerning environmental governance, environmental impact assessments, public participation, protected areas, enforcement and the Vlora Airport issue. The report was published on 4 November 2025.
European Commission — Albania Report 2025
EC Albania Report 2025 — alternative PDF source supplied in the petition - European Parliament — Resolution on the 2025 Commission Report on Albania, adopted 17 June 2026. The official parliamentary record confirms adoption by 483 votes to 103, with 70 abstentions.
European Parliament — official procedure file
European Parliament — adopted text T10-0217/2026
European Parliament — press release and vote result, 17 June 2026 - Peter L. Wilson / architecture and political authority. The Archined article discusses The Albanian Calls and Wilson’s description of parallel planning routes involving the ordinary planning process and direct access to Edi Rama. For the specific quotation, a published transcription reproduces Wilson saying that one route is the normal planning office and another is going directly to Rama, followed by the statement: “if he likes it, then it gets a permit.” The quotation should continue to be presented as Wilson’s statement rather than an independently proven fact.
Archined — The Albanians are Calling (Architects Out)
Exit.al — published transcript containing Peter L. Wilson’s statement - Council of Europe / Bern Convention — Vjosa-Narta and Vlora Airport. The official Bern Convention case page states that Recommendation No. 219 (2023) concerned the possible impacts of infrastructure and urbanisation, particularly Vlora International Airport, on the Vjosa-Narta Protected Area, and records that the recommendation urged the Albanian authorities to halt construction of the airport.
Council of Europe — Bern Convention Vjosa/Vlora Airport case
Council of Europe — Recommendation No. 219 (2023) listing - BirdLife International — ecological significance of Vjosa-Narta. BirdLife reports that Vjosa-Narta is an important stopover on the Adriatic Flyway and supports more than 200 bird species and more than 70 endangered species.
BirdLife International — Saving the bird paradise of the Vjosa-Narta Lagoon in Albania - PPNEA — evidence concerning Pishë Poro-Nartë and development pressure. PPNEA has published field documentation and statements concerning interventions in the protected landscape, environmental assessment, public participation and its campaign to protect Vjosa-Narta. These are civil-society/environmental sources and should be attributed to PPNEA rather than presented as official governmental findings.
PPNEA — May 2026 press release on Pishë Poro-Nartë
PPNEA — Press release on the situation in Vjosa-Narta, 15 May 2026 - RIBAJ — profile of Edi Rama and the architectural basis for RIBA’s recognition.
RIBAJ — Profile: Edi Rama, Prime Minister of Albania
Image credit: PPNEA — Protection and Preservation of Natural Environment in Albania. Used for campaign and advocacy purposes.
255
The Issue
Architecture must serve people and planet — not power.
On 12 March 2026, the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) named Albanian Prime Minister Edi Rama an Honorary Fellow. RIBA describes Honorary Fellowship as recognising people who have made a significant contribution to architecture and the built environment, including people who help influence its delivery in a more sustainable way and nurture the interests of future generations. (Reference 1-2)
We are therefore asking RIBA a simple but serious question:
Is retaining Edi Rama’s Honorary Fellowship compatible with those principles in light of documented European institutional concerns about Albania’s environmental protections, and publicly stated accounts raising questions about the relationship between political authority and architectural planning? (Reference 4-9)
We, the undersigned, call on RIBA to accept a complaint under its applicable Disciplinary Rules or, if RIBA considers these matters potentially serious and/or in the public interest, initiate its own Complaint under Rule 2.10; examine the evidence fairly; provide Edi Rama an opportunity to respond; publish a reasoned conclusion to the fullest extent consistent with due process; and revoke the Honorary Fellowship if the applicable evidence and standards justify that sanction. (Reference 2-3)
This petition concerns accountability
This petition is not directed against Albania, architecture, tourism, investment, development or any political party. It concerns the standards that should govern decisions affecting the built and natural environment.
Architectural and development projects should advance through transparent institutions, equal rules, environmental safeguards, technical scrutiny and meaningful public participation. Professional recognition should be consistent with those principles, particularly where the recipient is a serving political leader whose public authority influences planning and development. (Reference 2-4-5)
Architecture should succeed because it survives a fair, transparent and accountable process.
Not because it has found the right political door.
Evidence concerning architecture and political authority
Architect Peter L. Wilson of BOLLES+WILSON has publicly discussed his experience of working in Albania. In an account reported by architecture publication Archined in connection with The Albanian Calls, Wilson described what he regarded as two parallel approaches to obtaining planning permission: an ordinary route involving planning regulations and institutional procedures, and another involving direct access to Prime Minister Edi Rama.
Wilson is quoted as stating:
“If Edi likes it, then it gets a permit.” (Reference 6)
These are Peter L. Wilson’s statements. This petition does not present them as independently established facts. A recorded or published statement is evidence that the statement was made; it is not, by itself, proof that any particular permit was unlawful, that formal procedures were bypassed, or that any individual acted improperly.
The statements nevertheless raise a question that falls squarely within the public responsibilities of architecture and planning. If political approval can in practice become more important than ordinary planning procedures, technical scrutiny, environmental assessment or institutional review, RIBA should examine the professional significance of that claim, together with any evidence supporting or contradicting it. (Reference 3-6)
The issue is not architectural taste.
It is whether institutions, rules and professional scrutiny remain decisive when major political and development interests are involved.
European institutions have raised serious concerns about environmental governance (Reference 4)
The European Commission’s 2025 Albania Report identified substantial shortcomings in Albania’s environmental governance and its alignment with EU environmental standards.
Under Chapter 27 — Environment and Climate Change, the Commission stated that Albania needed significantly to improve the alignment and implementation of environmental legislation, particularly the Environmental Impact Assessment and Strategic Environmental Assessment Directives. It identified weak institutional capacity for coordinated environmental planning, poor-quality environmental impact assessments, recommendations that were rarely implemented or monitored, low public participation in decision-making and limited enforcement.
The Commission also concluded that the 2024 amendments to Albania’s Law on Protected Areas had weakened protection, while inspection and enforcement capacity had deteriorated, particularly in relation to environmental crime in protected areas. It stated that environmental monitoring and administrative capacity needed strengthening to meet EU standards.
On nature protection specifically, the Commission found that alignment with the EU Birds and Habitats Directives required further improvement and stated that the 2024 amendments had resulted in a deterioration in nature protection. It also raised concerns about continued development and investment pressure affecting protected areas.
The report further noted that construction of the new Vlora Airport within the Pishë Poro-Narta Protected Area was continuing despite requests made by the Standing Committee of the Bern Convention in December 2023 and December 2024 to suspend the works until a new and sufficient environmental impact assessment procedure had been conducted.
These findings concern matters central to the responsibilities of architecture and development: environmental assessment, planning, institutional capacity, monitoring, enforcement, public participation and the integrity of protected areas.
The European Parliament called for stronger action (Reference 5)
On 17 June 2026, the European Parliament adopted its resolution concerning the European Commission’s 2025 Albania Report by 483 votes in favour, 103 against and 70 abstentions.
The adopted resolution expressed serious concern about developments within the Vjosa-Narta protected area and called on the Albanian authorities to establish an immediate moratorium on new permitting procedures, construction works and development interventions within protected areas until provisions of the amended Protected Areas legislation incompatible with EU nature-protection standards are repealed and full compliance with those standards is ensured. It also called for projects in the area to undergo comprehensive environmental impact assessment in line with EU standards, including transparent public participation involving local communities, scientists and civil society.
These are not simply objections raised by individual campaigners. They form part of the formal institutional discussion surrounding Albania’s European integration and the implementation of the EU environmental acquis, including Chapter 27 on environment and climate change.
An architectural institution that confers an honour on a serving political leader for his contribution to architecture and the built environment should be prepared to examine whether these documented concerns have relevance to the values represented by that honour.
The significance of Vjosa-Narta (Reference 7-9)
Vjosa-Narta is a protected coastal landscape of exceptional ecological importance.
The area includes lagoons, wetlands, coastal forest and other important habitats and forms a major stopover area on the Adriatic Flyway for birds migrating between Europe and Africa. BirdLife International reports that the area supports more than 200 bird species and more than 70 species it describes as endangered.
The Flamingo has become a public symbol of efforts to defend Vjosa-Narta, but the significance of the landscape extends far beyond one species. BirdLife International, PPNEA — Protection and Preservation of Natural Environment in Albania, EuroNatur, scientists and other civil-society organisations have repeatedly raised concerns about development and infrastructure pressure affecting the area.
The concerns surrounding Vjosa-Narta have also reached international institutions. The Bern Convention has scrutinised infrastructure development affecting the area, while the European Commission subsequently recorded the Standing Committee’s requests to suspend construction of Vlora Airport pending a new and sufficient environmental impact assessment.
Vjosa-Narta therefore raises a direct question about the credibility of protected-area status:
When major development is proposed in or affecting a protected landscape, does “protected” continue to mean protected?
The authorities should be able to demonstrate compliance with environmental law through transparent permitting, adequate environmental assessment, independent scrutiny, effective enforcement and meaningful public participation.
Environmental protection cannot depend on the scale, prestige or financial importance of the proposed investment.
RIBA should apply its own standards
This petition does not ask RIBA to invent a new ethical standard.
It asks RIBA to apply the standards and procedures it already publishes.
RIBA states that Honorary Fellowship is a category of RIBA membership and that Honorary Fellows are subject to Byelaw 5 ‘Conduct’, including the RIBA Code of Conduct. RIBA describes its Code as being based on the principles of Integrity, Competence and Relationships, alongside concern for others and for the environment.
RIBA also states that members should promote and protect the public interest while taking account of future generations, and should strive to protect and enhance heritage and the natural environment.
RIBA appropriately notes that conduct outside the practice of architecture may not necessarily fall within the remit of the Code. However, it also states that where a complaint concerning the professional behaviour of an Honorary Fellow potentially offends against the honour, integrity or reputation of architecture or RIBA membership, its disciplinary procedures apply. If an Honorary Fellow is found to be in breach of Byelaw 5, available sanctions may include expulsion from membership and revocation of the title Honorary Fellow.
RIBA’s March 2025 Disciplinary Rules provide that complaints concerning conduct potentially offending against Byelaw 5 may be investigated where the required criteria and evidential threshold are met. They also provide, under Rule 2.10, that where a matter concerning a member comes to RIBA’s attention from any source and RIBA considers it potentially serious and/or in the public interest, RIBA may initiate a Complaint itself.
Byelaw 5 also protects due process by providing that a member against whom a charge is made has the right to be heard, either personally or through a representative.
That framework makes the matters raised by this petition appropriate for RIBA to consider and determine, without prejudging their outcome.
If an honorary title represents the values of the institution that awards it, that institution should also be prepared to examine whether continued possession of the honour remains compatible with those values when substantial evidence and documented institutional concerns arise.
Prestige cannot replace procedure.
Investment cannot replace accountability.
Political approval cannot replace independent institutions.
Architectural ambition cannot justify weakened environmental protection.
What we ask RIBA to do
We call upon the Royal Institute of British Architects to:
- Accept a complaint under RIBA’s applicable Disciplinary Rules or, if RIBA considers these matters potentially serious and/or in the public interest, initiate its own Complaint under Rule 2.10, having regard to Byelaw 5, concerning whether Edi Rama’s continued Honorary Fellowship remains compatible with the standards applicable to that honour.
- Examine the relevant evidence fairly and independently, including:
- Peter L. Wilson’s publicly documented account of working in Albania;
- the European Commission’s 2025 Albania Report and its findings concerning environmental assessment, public participation, enforcement and protected areas;
- the European Parliament’s resolution adopted on 17 June 2026;
- Albania’s Protected Areas legislation and its implementation;
- the circumstances and environmental assessment issues concerning Vlora Airport and Vjosa-Narta;
- relevant findings and recommendations of the Bern Convention;
- evidence submitted by BirdLife International, PPNEA and other environmental organisations;
- evidence from independent architects, planners, environmental experts, scientists, local communities and civil-society organisations;
- and any relevant evidence, explanation or response supplied by Edi Rama, the Albanian Government or other competent Albanian authorities.
- Provide Edi Rama a fair opportunity to respond to the matters raised and to submit evidence in support of his position.
- Determine whether the matters raised fall within RIBA’s applicable disciplinary and governance framework, including Byelaw 5 and the provisions applicable to Honorary Fellows.
- Publish a reasoned conclusion, to the fullest extent permitted by RIBA’s procedures and legitimate confidentiality requirements, explaining how its decision is consistent with its commitments to integrity, sustainability, environmental responsibility, public interest and future generations.
- Revoke Edi Rama’s Honorary Fellowship if, following a fair review or disciplinary process, RIBA concludes that the applicable threshold for that sanction has been met or that continued retention of the honour cannot be reconciled with the standards governing Honorary Fellowship.
We do not ask RIBA to assume that the claims raised in this petition are proved.
We ask RIBA to examine them.
This is bigger than one politician
The question raised by this petition is larger than Edi Rama. It concerns what the architectural profession chooses to recognise, legitimise and reward. Architecture can transform cities, create opportunity and improve people’s lives, but it also operates alongside enormous political, financial and institutional power. That is precisely why professional institutions should defend transparent planning, independent scrutiny, environmental protection and meaningful public participation.
Development and architectural ambition are not substitutes for accountable institutions. No person should stand above the planning process. No investment should stand above environmental law. No honorary title should stand above accountability. The credibility of professional recognition depends not only on whom an institution chooses to honour, but also on whether it is willing to examine that honour when substantial evidence and documented institutional concerns raise questions about compatibility with its stated principles.
Sign the petition
Ask RIBA to examine the evidence.
Ask RIBA to listen to architects, planners, scientists, citizens, environmental organisations, local communities, European institutions and all relevant parties.
Ask RIBA to give those concerned, including Edi Rama, a fair opportunity to be heard.
Ask RIBA to determine the facts and their professional significance independently.
And ask RIBA to apply its own standards regardless of political status, influence or prestige.
Architectural excellence cannot be separated from integrity, accountability, environmental responsibility and responsibility to future generations.
Architecture must serve people and planet — not power.
Flamingo Revolution Diaspora
For nature. For transparency. For accountable institutions. For future generations.
References
- RIBA — Edi Rama’s appointment as an Honorary Fellow, announced 12 March 2026. RIBA’s announcement lists “Edi Rama, Prime Minister of Albania” among its 2026 Honorary Fellows.
RIBA — RIBA announces 27 new Honorary Fellows - RIBA — Honorary Fellows, Byelaw 5 and possible revocation. RIBA states that Honorary Fellows are RIBA members subject to Byelaw 5 and the Code of Conduct. It expressly states that sanctions can include expulsion and revocation of the title Honorary Fellow.
RIBA — Honorary Fellows and Code of Conduct - RIBA — Disciplinary Rules, including Rule 2.10. Rule 2.10 states that RIBA may itself initiate a complaint where a matter concerning a member comes to its attention and RIBA considers it potentially serious and/or in the public interest.
RIBA — Disciplinary Rules, March 2025 PDF - European Commission — Albania Report 2025. This is the principal official EU source for the petition’s claims concerning environmental governance, environmental impact assessments, public participation, protected areas, enforcement and the Vlora Airport issue. The report was published on 4 November 2025.
European Commission — Albania Report 2025
EC Albania Report 2025 — alternative PDF source supplied in the petition - European Parliament — Resolution on the 2025 Commission Report on Albania, adopted 17 June 2026. The official parliamentary record confirms adoption by 483 votes to 103, with 70 abstentions.
European Parliament — official procedure file
European Parliament — adopted text T10-0217/2026
European Parliament — press release and vote result, 17 June 2026 - Peter L. Wilson / architecture and political authority. The Archined article discusses The Albanian Calls and Wilson’s description of parallel planning routes involving the ordinary planning process and direct access to Edi Rama. For the specific quotation, a published transcription reproduces Wilson saying that one route is the normal planning office and another is going directly to Rama, followed by the statement: “if he likes it, then it gets a permit.” The quotation should continue to be presented as Wilson’s statement rather than an independently proven fact.
Archined — The Albanians are Calling (Architects Out)
Exit.al — published transcript containing Peter L. Wilson’s statement - Council of Europe / Bern Convention — Vjosa-Narta and Vlora Airport. The official Bern Convention case page states that Recommendation No. 219 (2023) concerned the possible impacts of infrastructure and urbanisation, particularly Vlora International Airport, on the Vjosa-Narta Protected Area, and records that the recommendation urged the Albanian authorities to halt construction of the airport.
Council of Europe — Bern Convention Vjosa/Vlora Airport case
Council of Europe — Recommendation No. 219 (2023) listing - BirdLife International — ecological significance of Vjosa-Narta. BirdLife reports that Vjosa-Narta is an important stopover on the Adriatic Flyway and supports more than 200 bird species and more than 70 endangered species.
BirdLife International — Saving the bird paradise of the Vjosa-Narta Lagoon in Albania - PPNEA — evidence concerning Pishë Poro-Nartë and development pressure. PPNEA has published field documentation and statements concerning interventions in the protected landscape, environmental assessment, public participation and its campaign to protect Vjosa-Narta. These are civil-society/environmental sources and should be attributed to PPNEA rather than presented as official governmental findings.
PPNEA — May 2026 press release on Pishë Poro-Nartë
PPNEA — Press release on the situation in Vjosa-Narta, 15 May 2026 - RIBAJ — profile of Edi Rama and the architectural basis for RIBA’s recognition.
RIBAJ — Profile: Edi Rama, Prime Minister of Albania
Image credit: PPNEA — Protection and Preservation of Natural Environment in Albania. Used for campaign and advocacy purposes.
The Decision Makers
Supporter Voices
Petition Updates
Share this petition
Petition created on September 10, 2026