Does Slobodan Milosevic Have The Right To A Third Mandate?

"The same individual can be elected President of the Republic two times at most; but if that individual did not serve the full mandate, than a possible interpretation is that they were not elected", he said. Many constitutions, according to Markovic, abide by the principle that "if an individual did not serve at least half of the mandate, they will be considered as not having been elected in the first place".

Markovic observed that in actual fact the Serbian Constitution does indicate that the same individual can be elected President of the Republic a maximum of two times; but he claimed that the preceding clause states that a mandate lasts five years.

Markovic called on the old principle from ancient jurisprudence where a decree can not be interpreted in isolation, and only acquires significance when it is considered in relation to other similar decrees.

"From the intentions of Clause 86 the facts can be interpreted in such a way that elections did not occur if a mandate did not last five years", stated Markovic, predicting that "like every interpretation, this one will elicit counterarguments" but that "it is not uncommon that constitutional decrees polarize even law experts".

"Elections and political laws favor my interpretation. The key question is will the President of the Republic rely on this interpretation and run once again as candidate for this position, or will he not?".

There were many speculations in recent months on how law experts close to the regime will try to bend over backwards to "ensure" President Milosevic a third mandate. There were also attempts by the Opposition to elicit authoritative interpretations which would be binding for the government.

A representative of the Serbian Renewal Movement (SPO), Aleksandar Cotric, was waiting a full year for the answer to his question delivered in the Serbian Parliament. The question last year was the following: "Can Slobodan Milosevic be elected once more as President of Serbia?" "The question is outside the authority of the Law Ministry", was the final answer by the responsible Minister, Arandjel Markicevic, who called on "the interpretation of the Serbian Constitution".

The Vice-President of the same government, Dr. Ratko Markovic, is for now stating his views in the likely role of preparing someone's candidacy, and he is looking for a crack between two fairly clear-cut constitutional formulations. Clause 86, Paragraph 2 of the Serbian Constitution states: "The mandate of the President of the Republic is for five years".

Paragraph 3 of the same Clause: "The same individual can be elected President of the Republic a maximum of two times." Clause 87, Paragraph 1: "The mandate of the President of the Republic runs out before the period for which they were elected in the event of retraction or of resignation".

Professor Dr. Pavle Nikolic, a constitutional law expert, completely renounces the interpretation of Dr. Markovic in his statement for "Vreme".

"The possibility that Slobodan Milosevic could qualify a third time for a candidacy as President of Serbia is out of the question. The interpretation of Dr. Ratko Markovic that Milosevic is entitled because he did not serve to the full his first mandate, is unfounded".

The Constitution does not count or discount the number of years spent serving as President. It is clearly stated in the Constitution that one person can be elected President of the Republic a maximum of two times.

If Markovic's interpretation were accepted, what would happen with the mandates of representatives? As is well known, the mandate of representatives is four years, and it is not uncommon that it is completed before that period runs out. That someone's mandate, for whatever reason, lasts for a shorter time, is not a sufficient argument.

After all, the Constitution states that the mandate of the President of the Republic lasts five years; and since Milosevic served two years of his first term and full five years of the second, he could then, if Markovic's interpretation were accepted, only be elected for another three years. But, I repeat, the Constitution does not count years. If it were accepted that an individual who did not serve the full mandate had effectively not been elected, then the President of the Republic could resign every four years and nine months, and once again run for the Presidency.

However, I would not be surprised if Markovic's interpretation were to be accepted. The President of Serbia had broken the Constitution on many occasions. One of them was the freezing of the powers of the Party President, which is a completely unknown category. Then, after all that, in such a "frozen" state, the Party President was allowed to participate in party functions such as the Congress of the SPS held last year, or the recent meeting of their Head Committee.

What is the reaction of the Opposition? The party, which at this time has a presidential candidate, thinks that Dr. Markovic is announcing another election fraud.

SPO spokesman Ivan Kovacevic, in his interview with a "Vreme" journalist shortly following the aired statement of Dr. Markovic, said that the SPO thinks that with the announcement of Ratko Markovic, the Vice-President of the Serbian Government, the ground is being set for the most blatant braking of the Constitution since its ratification. However, in Kovacevic's opinion, Slobodan Milosevic has a history of braking the highest legal and political law of the country, as for instance when the 1992 elections for the President of the Republic were called at a time when none of the conditions for such action (retraction or resignation) were fulfilled. Kovacevic stated that "SPO will confront such aggression with utmost vigor at a time when SPS, after a proven elections fraud last year, has fallen to the lowest levels and is facing a loss at the parliamentary elections".

Thus the elections mixup has been raised to another power: the President of the Republic has the right to a third mandate; the President of the Republic does not have the right to a third mandate; the President of the Republic completed his first mandate unconstitutionally; the President of the Republic is braking the Constitution which was written up in 1990 according to the specifications of the present President of the Republic.

Perhaps the President of the Republic wishes for a lifetime mandate. The President of the Republic is merely taunting other presidential candidates.

The President of the Republic is leading everybody on.