Josip Perkovic Photo: slobodnadalmacija.hr

Hina news as shared by Croatian news portal dalje.com
Germany to ask Croatia to arrest ex-Yugoslav agent on 1 July

On 1 July, when it enters the European Union, Croatia can expect a warrant from Germany for the arrest of a former Yugoslav intelligence officer, Josip Perkovic, who is believed to have masterminded the murder of Croatian emigrant Stjepan Djurekovic near Munich in June 1983, the German Focus weekly reported on Sunday.
The German federal prosecutorial authorities will forward to Zagreb, on the first day of Croatia’s EU membership, the warrant for the arrest of Perkovic, 68, and for his extradition to Germany.
Perkovic, who used to be the at the helm of Croatia’s branch of the Yugoslav State Security Service (SDS), is charged with having sent murderers to kill dissident Djurekovic.
In 2008, Krunoslav Prates, a Croatian citizen was convicted by the Munich High State Court to life imprisonment for his role in the execution of Djurekovic, who was found dead in a garage in the Bavarian town of Wolfratshausen. Focus recalled that five shots were fired at the victim and that also he was hit by an axe to his head.
According to the weekly, arrest warrants for five more people have also been issued in Germany, as they are believed to have been Perkovic’s aides.
Prates was arrested in July 2005 on suspicion that he had helped prepare the Djurekovic murder in 1983. The German state prosecution suspects Djurekovic was killed by members of the then Yugoslav State Security Service (SDS). Djurekovic left the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY) for political reasons after the Yugoslav authorities labelled him a dangerous Croatian nationalist.
During the trial, Prates admitted to having cooperated with the Yugoslav intelligence, notably the chief of the Croatian SDS branch Perkovic, but denied any involvement in Djurekovic’s death.
Perkovic allegedly gave keys to the garage to as yet unidentified persons, who waited for Djurekovic in the garage outside Munich on 28 June 1983 and shot him dead.
During the announcement of the verdict in July 2008, the Munich court criticised Croatia for showing no interest in the case and for failing to see to it that Perkovic also appeared before the court for this case.
The judgement in the Prates case also reads that from 1970 to 1989, 22 Croats, who fled to Germany, were killed by the Yugoslav secret services.
In late 2010, the Der Spiegel magazine reported that German Interior Minister Thomas de Maiziere received a request to revoke the Federal Cross of Merit that had been awarded to Yugoslav President Josip Broz Tito by German President Gustav Heinemann in 1974.
The request for the posthumous revocation of the highest German order, which is awarded only to heads of state, has been filed by an unnamed citizen, “a victim of a failed assassination attempt by Yugoslav secret services.”
Der Spiegel mentioned the request in an article dealing with investigations by German federal prosecutors and the Ministry of the Interior into the killings of Croats in exile by Yugoslav secret services during the 1970-1989 period. It said that 14 people were currently under investigation and that international warrants had been issued for the arrest of six persons, two of whom had served as intelligence officers.
The weekly then gave details of the sentence handed down by the Munich High District Court in July 2008 against Prates for his role in the 1983 murder of Djurekovic.
The sentence said that Tito “directed political murders abroad” until his death in 1980, and that “Yugoslav political officials ordered murders that were carried out in the Federal Republic of Germany.”
The Munich court named Perkovic and Zdravko Mustac, also a former Yugoslav secret service agent, as being involved in the murder of Stjepan Djurekovic. The German federal prosecution at the time announced more investigations in connection with the murders of 22 Croatian activists in exile in Germany.
Mustac, 71, has claimed that he had not been acquainted with orders for killings Croat emigrants, however, he has said that the Yugoslav authorities “had the right to energetically deal with “extremist Croats in exile”. (Hina)

__________

Not only should Tito’s medals be revoked posthumously (bravo citizens of Germany!) but a posthumous criminal indictment must also be considered and contemplated. Evidence points to the conclusion that it was on Tito’s orders that multitudes of Croatian émigrés who fled Yugoslavia after World War II – and managed to escape a brutal death in communist purges – were murdered and labelled extremists and all they did was not agree with communist regime and social and national agenda. So, in simple terms, the communists turned into terrorists who hunted down anti-communists worldwide calling them extremists! The sad thing is that there are still a number of former communists in high places who still think like this, who still justify political murder as righteous! They must not succeed in their endeavours of glorifying communism. Ina Vukic, Prof. (Zgb); B.A., M.A.Ps. (Syd)

Newly-elected President of the General Assembly Amb. John Ashe
of Antigua and Barbuda (right) is congratulated by current President
Vuk Jeremic. UN Photo/Evan Schneider

“The United Nations General Assembly Friday June 14 elected by acclamation Ambassador John W. Ashe of Antigua and Barbuda as President of its upcoming 68th session.
Taking the floor immediately after his election, Mr. Ashe, who is Antigua and Barbuda’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations in New York, said that in 18 months, the world body would launch an agenda for sustainable development for all, which ‘may very well be the boldest and most ambitious project that the United Nations has ever had to accomplish.’
‘In order to succeed, the General Assembly needs to be equally bold, ambitious and collaborative if we are to rise to the task we are about to undertake and ensure its completion,’ he said, adding ‘failure is not an option. Let us show the world…we can be bold and decisive in our actions.’ ”

I’ve had plenty to say on this blog and elsewhere about Vuk Jeremic and his Presidency at the UN General Assembly and am especially proud to have been one of the initiators in questioning his motives and intentions around the organising of April 10 UNGA Thematic debate on “Role of International Criminal Justice on Reconciliation”.

Indeed, the debate was a flop, with several leading countries boycotting it.  While the Debate was supposed to address several international criminal tribunals such as for Lebanon, East Timor, Cambodia, Sierra Leone, former Yugoslavia (Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia…), Rwanda… it was obvious from the start that Jeremic was intending to make it all about Serbia and it’s disagreement with the Hague Tribunal’s acquittals of Croatian Generals of war crimes in November 2012. And this, of course is unacceptable because victims from all countries are equally important for UNGA and the UNGA President had a responsibility in ensuring that, rather than trying to bring Serbia’s issues and victims as the most important.

New York based Vecernji List journalist Jadranka Juresko-Kero reports on events at East River Friday 14 June and says that at the elections of the new UNGA President, Vuk Jeremic was convinced how his mandate will not be remembered as one of the successful ones and that a great majority of member states can’t wait for him to leave so that they may be able to forget as quickly as possible how the Serbian representative attempted to use that honourable position for the promotion of his own country’s interests, with such a forceful and diplomatically unbecoming manner.

“It’s customary for member states to applaud the work and efforts of an outgoing UNGA president at the election meeting for a new president”, writes Juresko – Kero. Not in this case. Juresko-Kero continues: “ How much regard member states hold for Vuk Jeremic is best reflected in that the Eastern Europe group of UN member states to which Croatia belongs did not, even as a matter of courtesy, thank Jeremic for his UN work on Friday. It’s the UN usual practice that at the elections of new GA president, the work of the exiting one is commended, and if he was truly successful all his efforts and contribution to the work of the UN are emphasized. In cases where member states are not satisfied with the candidate but believe that he did not have ill intentions they express gratitude as a matter of diplomatic courtesy, but that did not occur in Vuk Jeremic’s case. Vecernji List has found out via the representatives of US diplomacy that the Germans as representatives of the EU group also did not wish to acknowledge and convey positive messages for Jeremic’s work, but for protocol’s sake managed to coolly thank him for the ‘peculiar style’ he demonstrated in New York”.

“When we supported Vuk Jeremic’s election for the President of the General Assembly we believed that he, as a young and educated man, will be of wide views and cooperate with everyone and that Serbia, which has lost in every sense – war and territorial – will know how to value the diplomatic opportunity it received. We are deeply disappointed because Jeremic has turned his East River cabinet into a Serbian fortress, he exclusively deals with the problems of his country, ignores all others, manipulates the respect of this world organization and we all can hardly wait for his one year mandate to end this summer”, an EU diplomat reportedly said to Vecernji List journalist at East River on Friday.

To anyone – like Vuk Jeremic – who did not permit the victims of war crimes to be present at the April 10 UNGA Thematic Debate on the role of international criminal justice and reconciliation (a debate that touched them in every sense) I say: good riddance! I won’t even go into his awful antics whereby as UNGA President he organised celebrations of Serbian Orthdox New Year at East River, early in 2013, and had the Serb song “March on Drina” performed there, unbeknownst to the UN General Secretary and most member states’ representatives that this very song was hummed and sung by Serbian forces during their killing sprees in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina in the 1990’s! Of course victims’ organisations were in shock and complained and were abhorred, after which Ban Ki-moon, UN Secretary General was placed in the humiliating position of having to apologise to victims of that war for that awful orchestration at the UN. Ina Vukic, Prof. (Zgb); B.A., M.A.Ps. (Syd)

ICTY Judge Frederik Harhoff

Well, it’s been a most interesting (for want of a stronger word) week around interpretations of ICTY judgments that acquitted of war crimes some senior Croat and Serb military leaders, particularly in the past 18 months. Personal, but damming thoughts of Danish Judge Frederik Harhoff, which one can take or leave, have been leaked into the public arena and one cannot but stand abhorred!

Why on earth would a Judge of the Tribunal come out with his criticism of the same Tribunal and by doing so interfere with, or influence the process and the outcome of those ICTY cases which have yet to exhaust their right of appeal!?

Absolutely shocking! A Judge effectively denying uncontaminated justice/due process to parties within his own court! I hope Harhoff is made to suffer consequences for his poisoning of the mind-set of both the ICTY prosecutors (who would undoubtedly grow extra wings of false righteousness on the basis of Harhoff’s wicked public pondering) and the defendants who will surely feel intimidated by such poison. Harhoff should not sit on any bench, let alone the ICTY, a moment longer.

Judge Frederik Harhoff wrote a letter last week in which he criticised the ICTY President, US judge Theodor Meron. The letter seems to have been an email sent to a number of recipients, and it’s not clear to whether it was originally written in English, says Marko Milanovic of EJIL Talk.

Milanovic writes: “Harhoff is a judge on the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. His criticism amounts to a severe and dramatic accusation against the tribunal as a whole. He maintains that the American president of the tribunal has exercised ‘persistent’ and ‘intense’ pressure on his fellow judges to allow top-ranking officers to go free.
Harhoff’s five-page letter (PDF), the precise contents of which are confidential, was addressed to 56 people, including several lawyers. In the letter, Harhoff scrutinises and criticises a series of judgements acquitting Serbian and Croatian leaders.
‘The most recent of these judgements have occasioned a deep professional and moral dilemma for me, one that I have never before experienced. The worst of it is the suspicion that some of my colleagues have been exposed to short-term political pressure and this completely changes the premises of my work to serve the principles of justice and reason”, Harhoff writes in the letter. He makes it clear that the development “has awoken deep concerns both in myself and other colleagues in the corridors of this tribunal’.
…
‘It would seem’, writes Judge Harhoff, ‘that the military establishment’ in leading states such as Israel and the US ‘felt that the tribunal was getting too close to top-ranking military commands.’
He continues:
‘Has an Israeli or American official influenced the American President of the tribunal to effect a change of course?’ Harhoff writes in the letter.
…
Judge Harhoff states in his letter that the public ‘will probably never’ be told to what extent his suspicion that the American President of the tribunal has influenced the result of the case for political reasons is true:
‘But the report of the American president of the tribunal’s persistent pressure on his colleagues in the Gotovina and Perisic cases does more than suggest that he was fairly intent on arriving at an acquittal and especially that he was lucky in being able to persuade the ageing Turkish judge to change his mind at the last minute.’
The ‘ageing Turkish judge’, Harhoff refers to is the 77-year-old Mehmet Güney, who voted in November to release the two Croatian generals Gotovina and Markac.
Harhoff says that the new precedent ‘will in future and in the majority of cases allow the top-ranking person to go free. This means that American (and Israeli) commanders in chief can breathe a sigh of relief…’. Harhoff adds ‘I am left with the distinctly unpleasant impression that the tribunal has shifted course as a result of the pressure from ‘the military establishment’ of certain powerful countries’. “

Marlise Simons, of New York Times, gives a further insight into possible motives behind Harhoff’s letter: political lobbying within ICTY towards elections of its President, due in autumn 2013?  She writes: “A spokesman at the court declined to comment on the letter. Other judges and lawyers were willing to speak, provided that their names were not used.
By their accounts, a mini-rebellion has been brewing against Judge Meron, prompting some of the 18 judges of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia to group around an alternative candidate for the scheduled election for tribunal president this fall. Until now, Judge Meron had been expected to be re-elected”.

Judge Harhoff writes in his letter: “…Right up until autumn 2012, it has been a more or less set practice at the court that military commanders were held responsible for war crimes that their subordinates committed during the war in the former Yugoslavia from 1992-95, when the Daytona Agreement brought an end to the war in December 1995.

The responsibility then was either normal criminal responsibility as either (1) contributing to or (2) responsibility for the top officers with command responsibilities in a military system of command authority where these failed to prevent the crime or punish the subordinates. There is nothing new in this. We had also developed an extended criminal responsibility for people (ministers, politicians, military leaders, officers and others), who had supported an overall goal to eradicate ethnic groups from certain areas through criminal violence, and which in one way or another contributed to the achievement of such a goal; it is this responsibility that goes by the name of “joint criminal enterprise”.

But then the court’s Appeals Chamber suddenly back-tracked last autumn with the three Croatian generals and ministers in the Gotovina case. They were acquitted for the Croatian army’s war crimes while driving out Serbian forces and the Serbian people from major areas in Croatia – the so-called Krajina area in August 1995 (home to generations of Serbians)”.

Oh my God! This is a judge saying this! He just simply does not accept the fact that the Croatian generals were acquitted on appeal of “join criminal enterprise” (i.e. driving out Serbian forces and Serbian people)! And he is a Judge in the same Tribunal!

Luka Misetic, defence attorney for Croatian General Ante Gotovina has registered his comment on Harhoff’s letter :

“Marko Milanovic writes: ‘Needless to say, this is one of the worst scandals to engulf the ICTY in its history, regardless of whether Harhoff’s accusations have a basis in fact or not.’
I find it troubling that something can be deemed a scandal ‘regardless of whether Harhoff’s accusations have a basis in fact or not.’ If something has no basis in fact, it is not a ‘scandal,’ it is defamation. I agree with Professor David Kaye, who noted that Harhoff’s email “reflects a ‘conspiracist attitude, tinged with anti-semitism, is obnoxious.’ Moreover, Harhoff doesn’t offer any evidence for these claims.
I also note the inconsistency of Harhoff’s claims: on the one hand, Judge Orie allegedly succumbed to ‘American pressure’ to acquit Jovica Stanisic and Franko Simatovic, yet on the other hand Orie’s conviction of Ante Gotovina was allegedly overturned by the Appeals Chamber ‘under American pressure.’ Which one is it? Is Orie subject to ‘American pressure’ as claimed in the Stanisic case, or is he the victim of ‘American pressure’ as in Gotovina?
Moreover, Harhoff’s claim that Judge Meron put pressure on Orie to finish the Stanisic judgement by the end of May is probably true. However, there is a big distinction to be made between ‘finishing the case,’ and actually interfering as to the actual decision in the case. The ‘pressure’ by Meron was not imposed by the Americans, but rather the Security Council, which noted in a resolution that the ICTY Appeals Chamber will only hear cases in which the Notice of Appeal is filed by 30 June 2013. Any cases in which the Notice of Appeal is filed on 1 July 2013 or thereafter will be heard by the new Residual Mechanism. This is likely the reason why both the Stanisic and Prlic cases were decided in the last week of May 2013, i.e. so that both cases could be heard by the ICTY Appeals Chamber. This reflects Security Council pressure on Meron to implement the Completion Strategy (which Meron as President of the ICTY is duty bound to implement), and certainly does NOT mean that Meron actually put pressure on any Trial Chamber concerning the RESULT to be reached in these cases. The fact that Harhoff is not familiar with Security Council deadlines concerning the ICTY’s completion strategy, and instead through rumor and innuendo impugns the reputations of both Meron and the ICTY, reflects at the very least a profound ignorance on Harhoff’s part.
Finally, it is ironic that Harhoff attacks the ‘specific direction’ finding in the Perisic case as proof of a ‘US / Israeli conspiracy’ to protect military commanders, given that Harhoff himself adopted the ‘specific direction’ standard in his recent judgement in the Zupljanin case. (See paragraph 786 here).
If Harhoff really had a problem with the ‘specific direction’ standard, he shouldn’t have adopted it in Zupljanin. Rather, he should have written a well reasoned dissent, explaining the legal reasoning behind his objection to the ‘specific direction’ standard. Instead, Harhoff to his discredit chose to follow the Appeals Chamber’s lead while ‘on duty’ as an ICTY judge, but when off duty chose to impugn the integrity of his ICTY colleagues in a frivolous email to over 50 of his friends.
Shame on him. Harhoff should be reminded of the old adage: ‘When you point a finger of accusation at someone else, remember that you have three fingers pointing right back at you. Luka Misetic”

Having all above in mind: what hope does democracy have, what hope does humanity have when we have among us judges who prostitute the rule of law (as set by courts) so; cheapen justice and due process; fuel conspiracy theories that have not, up until now, found a voice among the judiciary!

There have been ample criticisms of the ICTY Trial Chamber’s decisions in the past years, and I myself have certainly not shied away from them. Dishing out of political decisions rather than justice has been a consensus between many independent analysts and commentators. However, when an ICTY judge joins the ranks of public analysts and commentators on the judgments of his own court then there is cause for alarm; due process of justice, which is inseparable from independence of the bench, is profoundly compromised. Furthermore, it gives cause to question every decision, every judgment, ever delivered by the ICTY, every indictment ever delivered by the ICTY Prosecution.

Not only that, it would seem that the world does not need due process any more: if it were up to Harhoff, all we need is an indictment, no trial, no appeal, – straight to prison! Ina Vukic, Prof. (Zgb); B.A., M.A.Ps. (Syd)

CHECK OUT MORE OPINION ON THE MATTER:

Dov Jacobs, Assistant Professor in International Law and International Criminal Law at Leiden University

Neven Mimica Photo: dpa

Croatia is set to enter the European Union as 28th member state on 1 July. Practically just days ahead of that date, the EU has been busy interviewing for a new member in its executive machinery. Croatia’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of European Integration, Neven Mimica, has evidently passed the interrogating interviewing session with flying colours. On 1 July 2013 he is to occupy his new position as Commissioner for Consumer Protection of the European Commission.
He had little if any competition for this position from Croatia as his nomination and support comes from Croatia’s government wings but, nevertheless, he satisfied the standards EC looks for. Generally, by European Law, every member state must have a member in the Commission.

“Mr.Mimica will be in charge of Costumer Protection, which is a huge responsibility considering that the Eurozone is one of the largest trading areas in the world, with millions of potential consumers. Mimica held a meeting on the 4th June in front of the Internal market and Public Health Committees of the EU, in which he outlined his program: removing barriers to online shopping, highlighting issues of interest to consumers and enforcing the stability of the Eurozone market.
The new member will help the Commission tackle the crisis in Europe, which, according to a recent short-term forecast of the European Central Bank, will be predictably negative for all this year.
Mentioning the crisis goes without saying but what was not expected is the recent Trade War between Europe and China. The European Commission, which was accused of protectionism by the Chinese policymakers after Brussels imposed duties on solar panels made in China, setting Beijing over the edge. The response was immediate: the country led by Xi Jinping responded by undergoing an anti-dumping and anti-subsidy investigation on European wines.
Both countries accuse each other of “dumping”, that means exporting at a lower price other than the production one.
This happened just few days after the new composition of the European Commission was unveiled. It will be interesting to see what happens next”, writes Ian Ssali of the Global Oyster

In another turn of the media, the British seem to have just discovered Neven Mimica’s communist past and appear uneasy about it, when it comes to an occupant of an important position such as EC Commissioner for Consumer Protection.

“PS With Croatia about to join the EU, stand by for its politicians — some of whom were apparatchiks in communist Yugoslavia — becoming top dogs in Brussels. One such is Neven Mimica, who is set to become EU Commissioner for Consumer Protection, a highly influential job and one with an effect on our lives here.
In 1977, Mimica joined ASTRA, a Yugoslav foreign-trade enterprise regarded by some as a nest of Belgrade spies. Then came the Socialist Republic of Croatia Committee for Foreign Relations, where he rose to be ‘Comrade Deputy President’.  In 1987, he became a ‘trade attaché’ at the Yugoslav embassy in Cairo where he was described as a ‘diligent’ servant of the communist regime.  Now he will be swishing round Brussels with a motorcade, telling us all what to do”, writes Richard Kay, The Daily Mail

Given the above, the obvious question to ask would be: Who are the real and the hidden consumers needing protection in the European Union machinery – the politicians and their agendas or the people at large among whom there are close to 20 million unemployed in the EU!? If political agenda drives consumer protection and all the wheeling and the dealing that goes on within this portfolio in order to stave off the inevitable rattling and breaking apart of the increasingly weak economy and weak measures so far placed into practice, to try and save the boat from drowning and breaking into pieces, then someone who may have grown a rigid skin via communist indoctrination might actually be what the “doctor” ordered. Experience has demonstrated that nothing frazzles a communist or pro-communist from pursuing his/her political focus and goal! Mimica’s appointment will according to some sources be for 12 months. New EU Parliament elections are due in 2014 and the new parliament may seek to elect new Commissioners. While Mimica is not an elected member of EU Parliament for Croatia, one imagines he will need to work extra hard in proving himself worthy of securing his continuance as Commissioner if the new generation of EU parliamentarians of 2014 are to go about choosing new blood in EC executive organs. Undoubtedly, if it comes to that, Croatian government will nominate him again for the position.  Ina Vukic, Prof. (Zgb); B.A., M.A.Ps. (Syd)

Memorial cemetery for victims of Vukovar Hospital 1991 massacre
Photo: Associated Press

It is said that the ICTY will close shop in 2014. There are still cases pending completion both in Trial and Appeal Chambers. Judging from the length of time previous cases had taken to completion it’s obvious that one year is nowhere near enough for due process to be satisfied under same conditions. ICTY’s “exit plan” or completion strategy may involve referral of cases to other existing international jurisdictions, create new mechanisms for dealing with the remainder of cases, refer cases to “local” jurisdictions in countries of the region, etc.  Whatever happens one thing should be kept in mind: due process deserves and demands similar conditions to those provided to completed cases.

Besides delivering its farcical and grotesque judgment against the 6 Croats from Herceg-Bosna (and the long deceased Croatian leadership headed by Franjo Tudjman)  on 29 May, on 30 May the ICTY Trial Chamber proved that its reasoning and judgment are indeed as grotesque as grotesque can possibly get.

On 30 May it brought down its decision in the case of Jovica Stanisic and Franko Simatovic – Serbs who were charged with having directed, organised, equipped, trained, armed and financed units of the Serbian State Security Service which murdered, persecuted, deported and forcibly transferred non-Serb civilians from Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) and Croatia between 1991 and 1995.

“The majority of Trial Chamber, Judge Picard dissenting, acquitted of all charges Jovica Stanisic and Franko Simatovic, former Chief of the Serbian State Security Service and former employee of the Serbian State Security Service.

The Chamber today found that those units committed the crimes of deportation, forcible transfer and murder at numerous locations in those two countries, and that they constitute persecution as a crime against humanity.
However, the Chamber found that Stanisic and Simatovic cannot be held criminally responsible for these crimes. After analysing evidence, the majority, Judge Picard dissenting, was unable to conclude that the accused shared the intent to further the common criminal purpose of the joint criminal enterprise. The Chamber also found that it was not proven beyond reasonable doubt that Stanisic or Simatovic planned or ordered the crimes. With regard to the allegations of aiding and abetting, the majority determined, Judge Picard dissenting, that in the instances that the two accused rendered assistance to the special units, this assistance was not specifically directed towards the commission of crimes”.

The decision (Judgment Summary PDF here) comes as a shock, to put it mildly.  It’s a second shock delivered by ICTY Trial Chamber within one week!

The records and evidence clearly show that Stanisic and Simatovic had been leaders in the ethnic cleansing enterprise of non-Serb population, had known that subordinates were committing crimes, and had done nothing to stop them.
The facts of the times covered by this case, the facts of Serb aggression against Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina are at distressing disagreement with this ICTY decision. The ICTY decision does not match factual history. It was actually forced deportations (ethnic cleansing) of non-Serb population that marked the start of the war. In Croatia these crimes were committed by Croatian Serb paramilitary forces and Jugoslav Peoples Army orchestrated and led by its Belgrade headquarters.

The ICTY Trial Chamber, amidst all the evidence pointing to Serbia’s involvement in the joint criminal enterprise against Croatia (and Bosnia and Herzegovina) and all the possible affirming conclusions it could have safely made from those facts, for its finding of exonerating Serbia of participating in joint criminal enterprise, evidently relied quite a bit on the fact that Serbia had not provided to the court any documentary or otherwise evidence as to the content of the meetings held in Belgrade between the accused and Serbia’s leadership, including Slobodan Milosevic!
“The Chamber noted that it had not received evidence about what was discussed at the meeting called by Stanisic…”, at 27 min 41 sec in ICTY Trial Chamber video of 30 May 2013 below.

Yet, in the case against the 6 Croats of Herceg-Bosna on 29 May 2013 the ICTY Trial Chamber took it upon itself to convict defenceless dead men (Croatian leaders Franjo Tudjman, Janko Bobetko, Gojko Susak, Mate Boban) of “planning and executing a joint criminal enterprise against Muslims in Bosnia and Herzegovina”, even though ample evidence before them, the dissenting opinion of a judge on the panel, clearly shows this not to have been the case!

The ICTY Trial Chamber judges in both cases took it upon themselves, it seems, to take a gambit view of evidence they did not have. They maneuvered the non-existence for the court of discussion contents of meetings in Serbia organised by Stanisic to benefit Serbia and they took the non-existence of dead Croatian leaders testimony to maneuver it against Croatia!

The bias and the latitudes of inferences the ICTY Trial judges (except the dissenting ones) in both cases have given themselves are staggering and, to quote attorney Luka Misetic – grotesque.

“This is really grotesque of the Hague tribunal. I was speechless that after 20 years the Hague tribunal arrived at this conclusion,” said Luka Misetic, who defended Croatian general Ante Gotovina before the UN court.

The madness emanating from the ICTY Trial Chamber, especially during the past couple of years, which can be taken as the years when politically motivated shaping of history of the war at the break up of former Yugoslavia has acquired and suffered from repeated panic attacks in pursuit of equating the aggressor with the victim, in pursuit of creating aggressors from those who defended themselves from aggression, ignoring to address aggression (such as employment of jihadist Mujahedins in Bosnia and herzegovina …, is so massive that it strikes one dumbfounded. And so, having that in mind, I cannot but agree with John Shattuck of the Boston Globe (War Crimes Whitewash)
“The tribunal ruling eviscerated the doctrine of command responsibility, a central principle of international criminal law. This principle was first applied by the Nuremburg tribunal established after World War II to judge the responsibility of Nazi leaders for crimes committed by the Nazi regime. If the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia majority had been sitting at Nuremberg, few, if any, Nazi leaders would have been convicted”.

Engulfed by this madness, by this injustice, by the terrifying power many ICTY Trial Chamber judges have evidently given themselves in interpreting evidence to suit political agendas, one takes solace from the ICTY Appeal Chamber and its potential for truth worthy jurisprudence in these cases. That yet needs to come, but having in mind that the closure of ICTY is apparently imminent for 2014, with yet indefinite ways as to how the cases in progress will be dealt with thereafter, the fret for justice continues.   Ina Vukic, Prof. (Zgb); B.A., M.A.Ps. (Syd)

Muslim Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina displays its mujahedin strength, Zenica 1994
(Photo first published in The London Times, 1994)

We have seen it over and over again: ICTY Prosecution is more than capable of building a case on shaky grounds for the so-called joint criminal enterprise against a group of people from one ethnic group (as this blog is about Croatia and Croats I’ll stick to that ethnic group) and bringing that criminal charge to trial. In the last year we have seen the ICTY Appeal Chamber acquit Croatian Generals Ante Gotovina and Mladen Markac (as well as Croatian leadership headed by Franjo Tudjman) of joint criminal enterprise plan and execution against Serbs in Croatia. In the last fortnight we have witnessed the ICTY Trial Chamber convict 6 Croats from Herceg-Bosna (as well as the 1990′s Croatian leadership headed by Franjo Tudjman) of joint criminal enterprise against Muslims. The ICTY prosecutors premise (malicious and dangerous delusion, if you ask me!) is that Croatia wanted to expand its territory into Bosnia and Herzegovina and by offering its military support to help Bosnian Croats who were victims of Serb and Muslim led crimes, Croatia became an aggressor against Bosnia and Herzegovina.

So, I ask myself: why has the ICTY prosecution not used the same logic with the fact that Bosnian Muslims brought into Bosnia and Herzegovina foreign jihadists, Al Qaeda operatives, mujahedins and therefore planned and executed a joint criminal enterprise – aggression within its own country. ICTY prosecutor used the country or citizenship origins of fighters in Bosnia and Herzegovina during the 1992 – 1995 war as a measure of aggression against the state of Bosnia and Herzegovina, so if a soldier belonged to a unit of say army from Croatia that went into Bosnia to assist Bosnian Croats who were defending their lives, then that unit is an aggressor against Bosnia and Herzegovina, according to the ICTY, as things stand at this moment in time!

But, bringing soldiers/killers from foreign countries specifically to train and fight with the Muslim controlled Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina is not aggression, according to ICTY prosecutor!

Oh, please – give humanity and its intelligence a break!

ICTY has had a handful of cases for war crimes committed through lines of command or responsibility by senior persons of Muslim controlled Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina – but none of these (as far as I can see) had the joint criminal enterprise element spelled out, even though it is as clear as day that Muslim leadership of Bosnia and Herzegovina, headed by Alija Izetbegovic, did not bring the mujahedins into his army for a nice vacation! The idea of pointing a finger against Alija Izetbegovic for planning and executing criminal enterprise against non-Muslim people of Bosnia and Herzegovina seems to have fizzled away in some political cloud that hovers above Britain and the United States of America, who it seems, played a double game: condemned jihadists and Al Qaeda on the one hand, but assisted or turned a blind eye to Alija Izetbegovic importing mujahedins to train his soldiers in murder and to murder for “his” Bosnia and Herzegovina, which decided mid-stream (because up till then Muslims and Croats were allies in defending territory and lives against Serb aggression in Bosnia and Herzegovina), “suddenly”, to fight against Bosnian Croats in 1993. And what a vicious fight or conflict it turned out to be.

The ICTY Trial Chamber has not yet published the full judgment in the case against 6 Croats of Herceg-Bosna even though the summary of judgment was published over a week ago (29 May). Extraordinary! That being the case it’s difficult to comment on the issue of Croat-Muslim conflict as seen by the Trial Chamber through the eyes of the so-called 6 Croats of Herceg-Bosna case, but the disturbing public confession of a mujahedin Ali Hamad a couple of days ago upon being threatened of expulsion from Bosnia and Herzegovina and actively seeking asylum in Serbia, is opening more and more eyes worldwide to the fact how this aspect of Bosnian Muslim army during 1990’s war has largely been overlooked from the standpoint of international aggression. All it seems knew of it, but somehow, the Bosnian Muslims’ import of foreign jihadist forces has evaded, it seems, the theorists of and prosecutors for “joint criminal enterprise”!

Dnevno.hr reports that, according to press online, an officer of Al Qaida, Ali Hamad, citizen of Bahrain, who has this week asked for asylum from Serbia after he completes serving his 12 year prison sentence in Bosnia and Herzegovina for 1997 bombing of Mostar, has admitted to having personally during the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, participated in horrible crimes by the “El Mujahedin” unit against Croats. His admission comes out of his remorse, her reportedly stated.

“The greatest number of murders were executed by the Egyptian Abu Mina,” Hamad said, “an officer assigned to security and special tasks. Mina murdered people with a chainsaw and with a large knife. He murdered prisoners at Zavidovici. He cut their heads off with an axe in front of standing mujahideens, and ordered us to impale the prisoners on stakes and leave them to die in terrible suffering…”

The Croat – Muslim conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina has largely been depicted in the international media (as well as the ICTY) as an attack on Bosnian Muslims.

Mujahedins from North Africa, Middle East, Pakistan, Afghanistan … started arriving in Bosnia and Herzegovina at the beginning of the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, at the invitation and plan of the Muslim president of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Alija Izetbegovic.  They arrived in the territory of Central Bosnia first, the areas of Bosnia and Herzegovina populated mainly by Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats. Mujahedins then started accumulating followers there and set up military training camps in the villages near Zenica, Travnik, Bugojno… They support and fight with the Bosnian Muslim forces, whose existence was threatened at that time and who were victims of the Serb occupation in Bosnia and Herzegovina.  But the real goal of the mujahedins coming to Bosnia and Herzegovina was far beyond training or humanitarian tasks. Mujahedins shared beliefs with their fellow Muslims of Bosnia and Herzegovina – to come to the aid of “oppressed” Muslims and use the opportunity to strike at “infidels”! Create a Muslim state in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Does did look like planned aggression to you!?

Does this look like true joint criminal enterprise planned by Alija Izetbegovic, Muslim leader in Bosnia and Herzegovina at the time, and executed?

It’s known that the British battalion, within the UN peace mission there, arrived in Central Bosnia at the same time as first mujahedins.

Only a few months after the British arrived a merciless conflict between Croats and Muslims erupted in the area. Incidentally or not, recruiters of mujahedins for the Army of Bosnia and Heerzegovina also came from Britain; British citizens… Mujahedins take part in military operations of the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina (Muslim). They commit untold atrocities against the Croatian population, using their well known brutal signatures – blood letting, destroying peoples’ faces, heart extraction, beheading.

The Islamist, jihadist connections of the Izetbegovic government are one of the most overlooked – or deliberately ignored – facts of the Bosnian War. It certainly continues to be so, unless the full judgment from ICTY Trial Chamber against 6 Croats of Herceg-Bosna actually opens new windows for justice, instead of playing politics and collective guilt.

Ali Hamad was a witness for the prosecution before the ICTY Trial against the commander of the Main Staff of the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina Bosniak General Rasim Delic, and Hamad’s testimony went largely undisputed and he said that authorities all knew about the crimes of mujahedin and their connections with the Bosniak (Muslim) politicians and officers.

And now this week Ali Hamad confesses he committed war crimes in Bosnia and Herzegovina as part of mujahedins, part of the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina. I hope that his wish to be extradited to Serbia upon completion of his prison sentence in Bosnia and Herzegovina for bombing of Mostar in 1992 will not be granted. I hope that work has already begun at Bosnia and Herzegovina’s public prosecutor’s office, at least, on compiling criminal charges for war crimes and participation in Muslim joint criminal enterprise against non-Muslims in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Ina Vukic, Prof. (Zgb); B.A., M.A.Ps. (Syd)

Joseph Goebbels, the Reich Minister of Propaganda of Nazi Germany (1933 – 1945) fierily worked under the motto:  “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it”.

Goebbels wasn’t the first politician in history to rely on the power of spoken words repetition in shaping attitudes and beliefs. Vladimir Lenin (communist revolutionary and Soviet Union Premier from 1922 till he died in 1924) used the technique of achieving belief in lies or half-truths as absolute truths also. His motto was: “A lie told often enough becomes truth“.

The first written trace of this abominable but powerful trend can perhaps be pinned down to the American philosopher and a father of modern Psychology William James who wrote in his work “The Will to Believe”, published by New World in 1896 these words: “There’s nothing so absurd that if you repeat it often enough, people will believe it.”

Having in mind the ICTY (Hague) judgment on 29 May 2013 against the 6 Croats from Herceg-Bosna,
which also names the late Croatian president Franjo Tudjman and his close officials (all of whom had passed away before the ICTY indictments in the case) it is absolutely essential to consider the evolution of the now seemingly accepted version (however untrue) of the story (initially spun by Stjepan Mesic, the former president of Croatia) that Croatia was an aggressor against Bosnia and Herzegovina because it’s leaders planned and executed a joint criminal enterprise in Herceg-Bosna to get rid of the Muslims there and secure the territory for Croats.

The regretful reality is that the ICTY Trial Chamber has accepted as truth the contents of the testimony that the former president of Croatia Stjepan Mesic first gave as witness for the prosecution in ICTY (in Closed/confidential session at Mesic’s/ prosecutor’s insistence!), in the case against Tihomir Blaskic from Bosnia and Herzegovina. It is of note that Mesic’s testimony was that of personal opinion, views and hearsay, which pointed the finger at Franjo Tudjman as having planned and executed a joint criminal enterprise in Herceg-Bosna with the aim to cleanse that area of Bosnian Muslims and have it all Croatian.
Stjepan Mesic spoke in his testimony of March 1991 meetings in Karadjordjevo between Franjo Tudjman and Serbia’s Slobodan Milosevic and although he, himself, was not present at these meetings (which, by the way, would be nothing unusual for any country in the world when one [Croatia] was seceding from the other [communist Yugoslavia], and Serbia was fiercely against this), he insisted that Tudjman and Milosevic had at these meetings agreed to divide Bosnia and Herzegovina between Croatia and Serbia and agreed to start the war!

Of course, since Mesic’s testimony was secret/closed/confidential it was impossible to react to it or refute it publicly at the time or any time before Tudjman’s death in 1999.  Mesic used to voice the same allegations about Tudjman-Milosevic meetings publicly before and after his appearance in the Hague – all from the time when he set his eyes on Tudjman’s job, around 1992/93, and commenced a horrid campaign of vilification against Tudjman, conducting it ever since ever since. While Tudjman’s public reaction to Mesic’s ICTY testimony would have been called for, reacting to Mesic’s verbal vomit in the media prior to that time would have meant dignifying it with a reply. Gradually, though, the world media happily picked up on Mesic’s scandalous stories and opinions – it never stopped to ask the question: where is the proof other than that he said/she said, where are the minutes or notes from 1991 meetings between Tudjman and Milosevic? Certainly, there were ample statements and opinions by numerous Croatian identities refuting what Mesic and his followers were saying, but much of the world’s media decided it would run with the Mesic version – his was more scandalous and attention grabbing in the scheme of things that swelled the tides against Tudjman whom they considered a nationalist and an autocrat(!).

Needless to say the ICTY prosecution must have loved Mesic; he seemingly provided it with a “believable” framework around which it could build the theory of joint criminal enterprise and after all, Mesic was the second person in Croatia at the relevant times – so he must be credible!? (Mesic served as Prime Minister, as president of the Croatian Democratic Union/HDZ Executive Council, then Speaker of Croatian Parliament until booted out in 1994, when reportedly caught/proven a liar by many but also Tudjman.)

There is no doubt that horrible crimes were committed against Muslims (and Croats, and Serbs, I might add) during the time and across the territory of Herceg-Bosna covered by this ICTY indictment and eventual conviction on 29 May 2013. However, to reduce the perpetration of these horrid crimes to a joint criminal enterprise, to some collective guilt based on political motives as fed to the court through wild verbal testimony, and with not a shred of evidence that these 6 Croats from Herceg Bosna had committed a single one of these horrible crimes contained in the indictment, is absolutely distressing.

Setting aside the presiding Judge Antonetti’s dissenting opinion, which clearly says that joint criminal enterprise by Croatia against Muslims of Herceg-Bosna did not exist, one needs to wonder what powers are afoot in the ICTY to stamp a lie – or at least a most unsafe verbal testimony – into a truth? A striking resemblance to how Goebbels would have gone about getting lies to be adopted as truths. I shudder to think that just because Stjepan Mesic had high positions in Croatia, including being the President after Tudjman’s death, the ICTY Trial Chamber took his veracity and honesty of his words as unquestionable!  It certainly appears to have done that.

So the accused and all of the convicted did not actually commit war crimes – murder, rape, wanton destruction … – but as members of the so-called joint criminal enterprise (constituted of these war crimes), according to the ICTY Trial Chamber’s judgment “ … secured personnel and coordinated the operations on the ground to carry out the crimes,” judges concluded!

Furthermore, it is absolutely scandalous that the ICTY Trial Chamber concluded that since the accused did not commit the crimes that were otherwise proven to have been committed (by someone!) it’s logical to pin these crimes against the accused and the Croatian leaders by way of participating in the joint criminal enterprise. From the Summary of Judgment: “The Accused are charged under all the forms of liability set out in Article 7 (1) of the Statute (including commission through participation in a joint criminal enterprise) and command responsibility under Article 7 (3) of the Statute. Considering the extent of the crimes charged against the six Accused and found proven by the Chamber, the Chamber finds, by a majority with the Presiding Judge dissenting, that analysing their responsibility by virtue of their participation in a joint criminal enterprise is the obvious legal approach. Consequently, the other modes of participation alleged in the Indictment have only been considered for those crimes that do not come under the joint criminal enterprise”.

“Obvious legal approach”! Can you believe this political prop and an attempt to justify the apparent painfully pathetic and unjust ways the ICTY prosecution and Trial Chamber have conducted this case!?

Obvious for whom!? It certainly isn’t obvious to me – and I bet it isn’t obvious to everyone who pursues safe verdicts in criminal justice.

Whichever way one tosses and turns the evidence from the fighting in Bosnia and Herzegovina one WILL NOT find any significant cooperation between Serb and Croatian forces in Bosnia and Herzegovina that would even provide an inkling of support for Mesic’s claims that there was the intention/agreement to divide Bosnia and Herzegovina between them! Muslims, though, seemed to have perceived themselves as being trapped between the two and their resistance was fierce. 1993 Vance Owen Peace Plan giving Croats command over areas where Muslims lived as ethnic majority would have fueled such perceptions decisively – but ICTY Trial Chamber gave no consideration to this fact! In fact, the fiction work by Mesic seems to have been more important to ICTY Trial Chamber than the sorry truth of calamitous and anger  provoking interference by the international community in addressing the complex ethnic issues of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

A full ICTY Trial Chamber judgment from 29 May 2013 reportedly contains over 2,600 pages and it’s being prepared still; it was not published at the same time as its summary – extraordinary! Intending no disrespect towards the victims, I can’t wait to read the gruesome details of crimes proven to have been committed by unnamed and unknown individuals and not by those who have copped the guilty by association or motive verdict!

The verdict of joint criminal enterprise perpetrated in order to create an independent Croatian Republic of Herceg-Bosna, and eventually join it to the Republic of Croatia suggests that the very idea of secession is, in itself, now considered a criminal act! Why has the international community tolerated and accepted the created Serbian Republic within Bosnia and Herzegovina (which records all manner of war crimes, including Srebrenica genocide) since Dayton agreement of 1995!? Croatia’s, Bosnia and Herzegovina’s, Slovenia’s and Macedonian secession from former Yugoslavia during those years was not and is not considered a criminal act, so a certain domino effect of secession attempts at that time must have been  expected to spill within the seceded states of former Yugoslavia and facts show that there were in fact several: Croatian Serbs with the aid of Belgrade led Yugoslav Peoples Army attempted to secede their self-proclaimed and brutalised Serb Republic of Krajina from Republic of Croatia, Serbian Republic in Bosnia and Herzegovina did the same, only with better success; Kosovo has been attempting the same – to secede or gain independence from Serbia. No one though has yet been prosecuted for the act of secession! The means to achieve secession seems to be the focal point of the ICTY prosecution, i.e. war crimes. If that is the case, and it certainly seems to be, why has the ICTY not gone after the actual individual perpetrators of those crimes? The answer could very well lie in political plots, which seem to favour one nation of people or one leader more than others – in attempts to judge history and not real criminals.

And since I’m writing about Stjepan Mesic and his public statements he has always said that individuals and not politics are responsible for war crimes and must be prosecuted – he had evidently held a different candle when he told his story to the ICTY Trial Chamber hearings.

Visiting Switzerland, Buchs, in March 1992, Stjepan Mesic was asked: Are the claims about an agreement between Tudjman and Milosevic regarding the territorial division of Bosnia and Herzegovina at all true? Mesic replied: “They are not. There are no agreements between Tudjman and Milosevic. We have talked with Milosevic because we had to find out what the thief wants.” This is the translation into English from the March 1992 Buchs video that follows here below:

When seen through the politically strategic and copious instances of Mesic’s media statements with the same or similar content (that Tudjman and Milosevic agreed to start the war in 1991 and to divide Bosnia and Herzegovina between Croatia and Serbia), before and after his testimony at the ICTY, one must, absolutely must, question the truth in what he says and said on the matter.

It is utterly regretful that, after confidentiality was lifted from his ICTY testimony, there have been no attempts by the Croatian government to bring the matter to some court proceedings in order to pin down the truths and the lies of Mesic’s claims. After all each of these has affected and will affect Croatia and its people gravely in the future. Perhaps the reason for this lies in the ugly truth where die-hard communists are and were (after Tudjman’s death) occupying the most important positions of government bodies. It is in no way beneficial to wait for years on end in the trust that an Appeal will overturn the verdict of joint criminal enterprise (as it had done in the Croatian Generals Ante Gotovina and Mladen Markac case). Mesic’s words are an immediate and urgent problem Croatia needs to solve for the benefit of its people, not for some argy-bargy historical entry into the journal of the breakup of former Yugoslasvia. Ina Vukic, Prof. (Zgb); B.A., M.A.Ps. (Syd)

Reblogged from Eyes of the Mind:

Franjo Tudjman Photo: http://www.tudjman.hr

Dr. Franjo Tudjman
Inaugural assembly of the Croatian Parliament speech
Zagreb, May 30th, 1990

Honorable representatives, esteemed guests and all who are present at this historical assembly of the Croatian Parliament!

First of all, on behalf of the Presidency of Croatia and in my own name I wish to thank you for the confidence you showed in us by electing us to this honorable and responsible office. Moreover, I dare say the most responsible office, because it requires the guarding and the representation, the strengthening and the assurance of full sovereignty of the Croatian nation and the inviolable freedoms and civil rights of all citizens of Croatia. Given that this is the first Croatian parliament ever to be elected by free and secret ballot, with the participation of all social classes, but also with the continuance of its historical survival at the fence of its independence, allow me to briefly remind you of the glorious traditions and historical adversities, as well as of the main mission before which we all stand, members of and representatives in the Croatian parliament together with the whole of the Croatian nation.

Honorable House of Representatives!

In carrying out our duties we need to always keep in mind the fact that in almost fourteen centuries of written history about Croats there has never been in any other institution of Croatian national life such outstanding declaration for survival, independence and self-determination as in the continued perpetuity and performance of the Croatian parliament.

The Croatian State parliament has, in relation to the other national and state communities, been the custodian of sovereignty of the Croatian people during all those long centuries (with the exception of the period from 1918 to 1941) and our burdensome history. The Croatian parliament had been the bearer of jurisprudential order, and with dependence on social circumstances of its time it had served as assurance of freedoms and citizens’ rights as well as of general advancement of civilization.

In the history of Croatian statehood the Parliament protects the interests of the majority (“political”) of people or classes against princes, that is, kings of self-sufficiency and tyranny. All of the most important happenings in political, cultural and religious life, from medieval to modern Croatia, take place in the Parliament. Byzantine poet Procopius (6th Century) notes that Slavs and Croats “live in democracy from ancient times,” solving general business “at joint gatherings.”  At the assembly in Rizana (804) the Istrian Croats demanded that the new Frankish authorities respect their native rights in relation to newcomers. At the field of Duvno “all of the common people of the land” were present for the coronation of King Tomislav (925). King Dmitar Zvonimir was solemnly crowned in Solin basilica (October 1075) after the people and the clergy had “in agreement, elected him as King of Croatia and Dalmatia” at the assembly in Solin. Further, Petar Kresimir IV at the assembly in Sibenik (1066), and Dmitar Zvonimir at the assembly in Knin (1087), endowed with royal freedom Zadar’s Benedictine abbey, that seat of spirituality, culture and education of the Croatian medieval era. At Bilino field (near Zenica) state church assembly (April 8th, 1203), in the presence of governor Kulin, Papal legate and numerous people settled the conflict around the phenomenon of Bosnian heterodox Christians. Even after the Croatian Kingdom was tied to Hungary in a personal union (1102 – 1526), then with the Habsburg crown (1527 – 1918), the Croatian Parliament and the Croatian Governor were the bearers of national sovereignty and defenders of statehood of the Triple Kingdom of Croatia, Dalmatia and Slavonia, even when they were territorially disconnected.

Debates at the highest levels of European civilization occurred in Croatian parliament…

Historical sources note the sitting of the Slavonian parliament (Congregatio regni Slavoniae) 1273, which represented the interests of the Croatian North, while the Croatian parliament (Congregatio regni Croatiae) held in 1351, in Podbrizani within Lika county, spoke about the interests of the Croatian area south from Gvozd. Both parliaments assembled together in 1533, and from 1557 the Parliament operated as a unified Croatian Slavonian Dalmatian Parliament. The Parliament was a class-based assembly (representatives of Aristocracy and Church) until 1848 and, hence, until 1918 it was a representative body of the people, albeit with electoral limitations.

Opposing the constant tendencies from Vienna and Budapest to turn the personal union of Croatia with Hungary and Austria into reality, i.e., that the ties to the joint crown were being abused with the aim of imposing German and Hungarian supremacy and dominance, the Croatian parliament and the Governor held onto the well-known principle: Kingdom does not impose laws upon Kingdom (Regnum regno non praescribit leges). Certainly, this initial viewpoint never lost its capability to defend the Croatian state sovereignty. Its effectiveness, though, in the past and present, has depended upon general circumstances, but also upon the wisdom and determination of the men who sat at the head of Croatia. The Croatian Parliament had been the highest legislative and administrative body during the time of the union with Hungarian and Austrian countries. The Croatian Governor, whose position was equal to that of viceroy in other countries, convened the Parliament. The Parliament passed laws independently and autonomously; confirmed Croatian citizenship; prescribed taxes and managed all financial affairs, customs, trade and traffic; and attended to administration of justice, teaching and education; but also it took care of territorial integrity and defense of the Croatian homeland by calling for recruitment into the army and appointing commanders of the Croatian army.

The fact that until 1845, and partly until 1847, Latin was spoken in the Croatian Parliament indicates that Latin, as the universal language of educated Europe, was a barrier to the hegemonistic attempts to impose German and Hungarian as official languages in Croatia, and that debates in Croatian parliament were held at the highest of levels of European civilization.

When on October 29th, 1918, Croatian Parliament severed “all former public law relations and ties between the Kingdom of Croatia, Dalmatia and Slavonia on the one hand, and the Kingdom of Hungary and the Austrian Empire on the other,” at the same time it transferred the executive but not the legislative power to the National Assembly of the State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs. And given that the Croatian Parliament never ratified the act of unification of this state and the Kingdom of Serbia, from December 1st, 1918, into the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, this act was considered as unconstitutional by all pro-Croatian state parties and as calculated to destroy the historical Croatian state sovereignty. The total history of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes (1918 – 1928) and Yugoslavia (1929 – 1941) occurred in the shadows of the Vidovdan centralistic constitution, passed in the Belgrade Congress in 1920 against the will of the Croatian people, and the constitution about the Republic of Croatia that was brought down by the elected presidency of the Croatian people, headed by Radic, at a party meeting as the Croatian Parliament had been dissolved. Hegemonic forces that caused increasingly deeper political crises by insisting on centralistic Unitarian order in Yugoslavia (Kingdom of), were forced to give into the same just before World War II.  However, agreement between Macek’s leadership and Prince Pavle and Cvetkovic about the creation of Banovina Croatia (Croatian Dominion) and the restoration of the Croatian Parliament not only came too late, but it was not accepted by the majority of the Serbian political parties who could not come to terms with the idea of the federalization of Yugoslavia. The consequences were in all that had happened during occupation and revolution.

The Croatian Parliament restored during Pavelic’s NDH (Independent State of Croatia), which followed and shared the destiny of the Axis fascist powers and Hitler’s European order, could not – of course, fulfill the task as the bearer and guardian of the Croatian state sovereignty. That historical role, in World War II circumstances, was taken over by ZAVNOH (The National Anti-Fascist Council of the People’s Liberation of Croatia), as revolutionary Parliament, establishing the Federative State of Croatia, within the framework of AVNOJ (Anti-Fascist Council of the People’s Liberation of Yugoslavia) principles pertaining to the right of every nation, including Croatian,  to self-determination and secession.

With the establishment of the Federative State of Croatia during the anti-fascist war, Croatian people found themselves on the side of the victorious democratic forces of U.S.A., Great Britain and U.S.S.R. There cannot be any doubt that this was a precondition for the international recognition of ZAVNOH and AVNOJ decisions to join Istria, Rijeka, Zadar and the islands to the Croatian homeland, likewise for the post-war constitutional regulation of the sovereignty of the Croatian Parliament.

Likewise, there can be no doubt that the one-party Communist system was the main barrier for true recognition of the Croatian and every other people’s right to self-determination and secession, the right which was proclaimed in all post-war constitutions of SFRJ (Socialist Federative Republic of Yugoslavia). There can also be no doubt that such constitutionally guaranteed, in reality denied, and internationally recognized right, offers a legal starting point for the realization of full state sovereignty of Croatia. And, on the basis of total historical experience, that of the earlier history and all that occurred from 1918 as well as from 1945 to the most recent in 1974 alike, the latter can only be realized on confederative foundations, as an alliance between free and sovereign states. We refer all those who cannot find a model for such a confederation to the modern example of creating the European Union.

Calling upon the ultimate prudence and deliberation…

Honorable representatives!

With democracy’s magnificent victory, which enabled the assembly of the composition of Croatian Parliament such as this one, a spiritual climate almost requiring big solemn words has been created.

However, the conditions under which we live, the circumstances which surround us, especially the tasks that are before us, do not permit glittering triumphalism nor big and easily given promises. Nevertheless, calling upon ultimate prudence and deliberation we are far from every despair and pessimistic despondence. Although we have walked only a short part of the road to parliamentary democracy, it was crucially important, the first step in the return of the Croatian people and their state to the civilized, political, cultural and economic tradition of Europe.

We need to acknowledge all the participants in the recently conducted free elections, as well as those in the current government, all in opposition who will replace those in government, or stay in opposition, for the peaceful and dignified – we could indeed say enviable – way in which the elections had proceeded. Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ) has won the majority of votes in all three houses of parliament and also the majority in more than two-thirds of local district assemblies. This, in itself, means that along with victorious glory, the honor to carry the heaviest part of the burden in the clearing of the impervious, thickety state of crisis left to us by the one-party system is bestowed upon HDZ. But, the remaining parties that have, as a result of the electoral competition, secured the “more comfortable” seats in the parliamentary opposition cannot avoid their part of responsibility, either. That is, rules and traditions of parliamentary democracy do not give the winner all the rights of a victor, nor do they classify the defeated into powerless losers, as it used to be during the one-party autocracy.

The results of Croatian elections are as remarkable as they are binding. With the free will of the people that was expressed in the most democratic way known to the modern world: at direct, secret, multi-party elections, the legislative power (and the right to appoint executive authorities) has been bestowed upon the party which has, on its program banners, emphasized the centuries-old aspirations of the Croatian people: to be free and to be his/her own self on his/her own land. That, in the spirit of generally accepted principles of modern humanity, the people have unimpeded right to national independence and an inviolate right to self-determination, which includes the right to a modern, independent state and to secession from other nations and state formations or to association with others in accordance with their life’s interests. On this occasion, and in this place, it’s important to emphasize that the fundamental aspirations for achieving democratic rights of all citizens and the sovereignty of Croatian people were present in the program demands of almost every party participating in the elections. Also, it needs to be mentioned that the world, which due to ignorance or wrong judgments of circumstance, but with deep curiosity, observed the elections in Croatia, was quickly convinced that the elections manifested a political maturity and wisdom of all participants, as well as the resolve of all the citizens and the whole of the Croatian nation to secure human rights for all citizens and national and state sovereignty of the Republic of Croatia through democratic elections. Moreover, not only the impartial but also the biased observers came to the realization that the elections in Croatia marked one of the shiniest victories of democracy within the frame of removing the existing Socialist one-party system.

Meanwhile, now that elections are behind us, it’s time that we turn all our vision and thoughts toward today, tomorrow and the future. If we had in our democratic goals proclaimed radical changes in all spheres of spiritual and material life, that does not mean that we are for disintegration, or even less for the destruction of that which has its justification in a democratic system, or that which can be turned through adjustments into general benefit. We have not received much goodness in the total inheritance from the previous government, but that does not mean that everything they leave us is without any value. That follows from the mere fact that the period of the old government was long lasting. All three generations had suffered, worked and created under its wings. Along with all the failures, it also has to leave positive consequences and trails, which cannot and must not be exposed to entire eradication.

The problems facing the new government are many, complex and tangled, from local communities and municipal councils, to the Parliament, the Government and the Presidency. Within a short period, they will parallelly need to solve many problems of life’s importance which other European and Western countries solved half a century ago, or even half a millennium ago. Let’s mention only the important ones: proprietary relationships and economic life; constitutional order of pluralistic civil society with the appropriate government system modeled on countries of the free world; modernization and revalorization of public services, especially science and culture, teaching and education, health and social welfare, administrative services and public activities (information, journalism, Radio and TV), etc.

Numerous very complex problems have accumulated in all of these areas, and without solving them in their reciprocity there can be no exit from the crisis, or real progress. And a great deal of talent and knowledge will be needed, determination and deliberation, but before everything and above all we would rather direct our efforts toward correct paths and lasting solutions. Personally, I am an optimist. I begin with a strong realization that in the public and among us who are taking up the burden of this enormous responsibility, the conviction that we need not start reinventing the wheel is prevalent. When we search for solutions to our developmental problems we need to utilize worldly experiences, especially those of the countries of the free world, always as guiding thought and stimulating core, and very often as an unmistakable ideal for quite definite solutions.

All changes must be implemented with consistent respect of principles of the rule of law government system …

Respected Assembly!

We live in an exciting and turbulent time. In a time that is filled with many openly present threats and insidious dangers. Many contemporaries were, and some still are, possessed by the nightmare of all kinds of hazards preying upon us along all our roads toward democracy and national sovereignty. Instead of tragic faintheartedness and passive feelings of impasse, I have personally always been more inclined to discovery and noticing those big chances that hid in that dramatic time and in the breaking point of a historical period. History has already given us the answer, which says that we were in the right when we did not want to reconcile with the prospect of continuing as an object of foreign politics and when we consciously took the risk in becoming the recognized subject and creator of our own destiny.

Although the generation I belong to is used to dangers and challenges of our time, only a small number could follow the spirit of today’s time. The same applies to the post-war generations who lived in peace but in limited freedoms and restricted incentives for creativity due to the terror of the Bolshevik totalitarianism. Those are the reasons why today we are once again, so to speak, at an historical beginning. Finding ourselves at this crossroads and burdened by the load of the past, we are, nevertheless, also richer for many experiences –albeit mostly negative – of life’s importance, such as political and economic and all other experiences.

According to my personal persuasion, the first and the most important task of the new democratic government in Croatia should be the creation of all spiritual, material and legal preconditions for the sense of legal civil and national security of all its citizens, for peace and trust among them. Not only the big scriptwriters from the opposing and especially hegemonic Unitarian and dogmatic camps, but also all those people who are tied to the past and who are confused by democratic movements and traditions to which they are not accustomed, do and will do everything in order to obstruct the realization of our goals, to inhibit and compromise the introduction of the rule of law system, order, work and morality. Luckily for us, and them as well, they must quickly come to understand the general internal and international circumstances, especially the omnipresent unavoidable collapse of the real Socialist system that will render their scenarios as futile historic anachronisms. That, of course, does not mean that we can afford to underestimate the dangers from different forms of threats, blackmail and even provocation which come our way almost daily from anti-Croatian and anti-democratic lairs and headquarters. On the contrary, that has to motivate us even more to jointly, all of us, and each individually, do everything so that reason, freedom and progress conquer passions, the rage of darkness and backwardness.

Respected ladies and gentlemen!

New circumstances, especially significant social and political changes, always confuse and even bewilder people. In their minds, enthusiastic hopes and ominous anxieties entangle and conflict. Our initial tasks, through mindful steps and decisions of legislative, executive and judicial authorities, must be to ensure that all citizens and residents have normal conditions for free enterprise and creativity, legal and civic security, work, savings and free life in the civilized system modeled upon democratic countries of the modern world.

We cannot, nor do we want to, guarantee to anyone some absolute equality or general social prosperity regardless of his or her abilities and work results. We just want to create equal preconditions for all, without discrimination, but to also ask for equal responsibility from all in the fulfilling of their legal obligations and in the respect of the rule of law system. With that in mind, I would like to emphasize that we should not count on any political “solidarity,” but, on the contrary, on creative, principle critique, from the benches of the parliamentary opposition and also from the intellectual ranks in all areas of social and intellectual life. We do not want to create or encourage any obedient subjects, intellectual adulators and flattering careerists, nor blinded political opponents or helpless haters, but responsible professional intellectuals and scientifically professional institutions who would, with their critical and positive intellectual creativity, contribute to the prosperity of their own people and to the general advancement of society in which they live and function.

The implementation of normal transference of government, i.e., replacement of the politically operational (functional) layer of the former one-party system, cannot be considered as any kind of revengefulness. That, of course, also goes for the de-bureaucratization of government administration within the modernization and democratization of superfluous institutions and supernumerary public servants. All changes must be implemented with consistent respect of principles of the rule of law government system, and all criminal proceedings and breaches of authority will be subsumed into the laws of our rule of law state system.

In European integration Croatia must ensure its independence and faster progress…

Honorable representatives and parliamentary officers!
At the end of this inaugural address, allow me to endeavor and put forward, in the briefest of points, some of the most urgent and immediate tasks that stand before the new democratic government of Croatia.
1.    New Constitution of the Republic of Croatia. The fundamental determinants of the new Croatian Constitution have been set in advance through the plebiscitary declaration of Croatian people for democratic freedoms of citizens and for state sovereignty at recent elections. Best-known people from the political and scientific life will be included into the Constitutional Commission. The new Constitution of Croatia must be free from all ideological dissents; it must be based on experiences of creating a Croatian state and in the spirit of the most democratic traditions of modern Europe and North American reality and science of law.

2.    Regulating the new constitutional position of Croatia in Yugoslavia. Given that we need to start from the fact that Croatia is situated in the system of Yugoslavia, which is a recognized member of the international order, we are prepared for negotiations with the representatives of the other nations of SFRY and federal bodies for the purpose of contractual regulations of mutual relations. Based on the totality of historical experience we hold that the state sovereignty within the community of other nations of SFRY can only be secured on confederative foundations, as is a contractual alliance of sovereign states.

3.    Inclusion into Europe and Europeanization of Croatia. Simultaneous with democratic transformation we need to undertake all necessary steps for Croatia to be included into the European Union as soon as possible. For centuries, Croatia has been a constituent part of the Western European (Mediterranean and Central-European) culture. Even when it did not have a full political state subject status, Croatia was inseparably connected to the Western European civilization. The contribution to European life several centuries ago, as well as through later history, by Croatian Latinists bears loud witness to that fact. The return to that cultural tradition must be multilayered. In European integration Croatia must secure its independence and faster progress.

4.    The establishment of the rule of law system in a state and the modernization of government administration. Consistency in distribution and responsibility of legislative, executive and judicial powers is a precondition of every genuine democracy. Thorough de-politicization of the judiciary and ensuring its absolute independence is among our first tasks. De-bureaucratization and modernization of the entire government administration requires organizational reform, and personnel and technological update.

5.    Spiritual renewal. The democratic movements within the period of the implementation of the first free elections have led to a kind of spiritual revival of the Croatian national pride. The declaration by the enormous majority of Croatian people of choosing the HDZ program goals had, in reality, marked the ending of that “civil war” which had lasted in Croatia since the time of World War II. The victory of the democratic spirit and unity between all Croatian citizens, regardless of their past and their views, has created the preconditions for the removal of all fatal divisions. Finally, divisions of people into first- and second-grade citizens, into conquerors and conquered, into suitable and unsuitable, into trustworthy and enemy, must disappear. We aspire to create a society in which human and work abilities, citizenship and moral virtues, and not origin and attitudinal orientation, will determine the position and value judgments about an individual in society. Beside that, we want to build the genuine democracy in which the rule of the majority will mean the protection of the minority.

6.    Radical changes to proprietary relationships and economy. Our democratic government is accepting Croatia in which there is a concerning state of economic impoverishment and general lagging behind Europe. It is necessary to find ways out of public ownership and create conditions for legal and financial security of all economic entrepreneurial projects, as soon as possible. In order to find the most favorable and the fastest solutions for changes in proprietary relationships, for the needed denationalization and re-privatization, for an effective tax system and bank and exchange operations, we need to, along with all our own experts, engage competent foreign professionals.

7.    Demographic revival. The former total politics of the past several decades have brought the Croatian national being into a state of demographic endangerment.  Beside the change in the spiritual political climate it is necessary to undertake urgent and purposeful steps towards preventing further emigration of our citizens as well as toward increasing natality.

8.    Return and inclusion of emigrants. The establishment of spiritual unity between domiciled and emigrated Croatia is undoubtedly one of HDZ’s successes, which already have significantly contributed to the carving out of democratic transformation. The new Croatian government should undertake purposeful steps on all levels for the enablement of the quickest possible return of as many Croatians as possible from the world to the homeland. We also need to seriously address the possibility of moving one part of members of Croatian minorities to the depopulated hearths of many parts of the Croatian countryside. Investments by Croatian émigrés in all areas of economic life should be motivated through special privileges. Our distinctive attention must be focused on that, because they have enormous work experiences, technological and financial potential at their disposal with which they can significantly contribute to a faster economic and democratic transformation of their homeland.

9.    The necessity of changes in public services. We need urgent and big changes in almost all areas of public life. Culture, science and education, health and social welfare, insurance, media and other public services are burdened with problems and substantial financial difficulties. The old regime leaves us in a spiritual and material desert in many areas, especially in education and teaching. We need the return to our pan-European educational traditions as much as we need a radical turnaround into the futuristic informational era. We need to remove the effects of coercion inflicted by ideological narrow-mindedness upon the culture and the arts by releasing the potential of creativity of modern artists and culturally ambitious people, and striving toward genuine appreciation of the authentic national cultural heritage, but also keeping in step with the superior accomplishments of modern culture of other nations.

10.    Moral renewal and work ethics. The unnatural real-Socialist system leaves us the inheritance of fatal consequences especially because it had, through its perversion, demolished and belittled all traditional values and moral norms. This equally relates to family and school education, to professional, work and business ethics. Distortions in the value system paved the way for the escape or apathy of the wise and the capable, and for the advancement of the incapable and inconsiderate careerists. It’s going to be a hard and long-lasting job making changes to such a distorted value system, but we must commence with that job immediately, in all spheres and pores of life.

Honorable representatives and officers of the first truly democratic Croatian Parliament!
In conclusion, I thank you once again on the trust you have shown and, at the same time, allow me to direct these words to all the citizens of Croatia and to the entire Croatian nation. Resurrecting – at the time of the electoral breaking point – the subdued and injured national conscience and the thwarted pride of Croatian people, and also the lost hope of all Croatian citizens, we have inspired, by releasing the enormous spiritual  and rational energy of the whole nation, an exultant reviving zeal. It’s up to us now, up to the new democratic government of Croatia, to maintain that elation and to channel that reawakened energy into work and creative endeavors for the realization of the sacred ideals of freedom and prosperity of our homeland. On that road, and for that divine goal, the primary and the largest responsibility is on all of us, the elected members of Parliament and representatives of the new Croatian democratic government, but also, on all Croatian citizens. That is, together we must be imbued by the awareness that we cannot expect from our Croatia more than we, ourselves, contribute to its advancement, so that we, ourselves, and our children, and children of our children may enjoy the fruits of our work.

Just as I had believed that the Croatian people would utter their mature word at the first democratic elections, from which this Croatian Parliament originates, so too am I all the more firmly convinced that, with the leadership of its true presidency, they will be able and will know how to build the life which free people deserve in their one and only, weary from suffering, but sacred homeland.

Thank you all from the bottom of my heart for your attention and for your role in this historical occurrence, and also to all those who gave us their trust, and, whom we must not and will not betray!
May our democratic and sovereign Croatia live and progress!

Source: http://www.sabor.hr  (Croatian Parliament website)
Translated into English by: Ina Vukic, prof. (Zgb); B.A., M.A.Ps. (Syd)

Reblogged from Eyes of the Mind: