Yugoslavia Hanging by the Hague String

Last week, at the General Meeting of the Democratic Party of Serbia, FRY President Vojislav Kostunica announced the closing rounds of the debate on regulating relations with the Hauge Tribunal, which he committed to on his trip to the USA.  He drew attention to the fact that "certain, occasionally odious compromises" are necessary.  The conclusion of this drama does not lack excitement.

This law was drawn up by a team which was headed by the Federal Minister of Justice Momcilo Grubac who is respected for his expert knowledge of criminal procedure.  Nebojsa Sarkic, Assistant to the Federal Justice Minister stated for the Tanjug News Agency that the draft of this law represents an attempt at striking a balance between Yugoslav sovereignity and the necessity for cooperating with the Hague Tribunal.  A working version of the draft appeared publicly, but it differs from the final version of the law, as Federal Justice Minister Momcilo Grubac informed VREME.  Still, politicians and legal experts have truned on the heat.  Kosta Savocki expressed himself negatively about this law, likening the handing over of the former Chief of State to the Hague with the act of capitulation.  Slobodan Soskic, a lawyer, stated on Monday at Belgrade's Press Club that the working version of this law with its 33 paragraphs is excellent and that it represents a good basis for cooperating with the Hague, and that opponents of cooperation with this international tribunal did not come up with a single solid legal argument.  Procedure is similar to the Law on Criminal Procedure connected with the extradition of foreign citizens to other countries.

ARTICLE 17:  Ph.D. Jovan Ciric with the Institue for Comparative Law draws attention to the fact that this law could encounter barriers at the Constitutional Court, given that Article 17 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia prohibits the extradition of our citizens to other states, while Article 47 of the Serbian Constitution stipulates that they cannot be handed over not only to any foreign state, but also to any foreign institution.  On the other hand, he states that arguments exists to the effect that the Hague Tribunal is not a foreign state but an international court which was founded by the UN Security Council.  That is why he thinks that it would have been better to amend the constitution prior to drafting the law on cooperation with the Hague Tribunal, but that this move was eschewed because of the balance of political forces.

The balance of power in the Yugoslav Parliament is such that without the consent of the Socialist People's Party (SNP) of Montenegro it is not possible to guarantee even a minimal majority for passing any law.  During their election campaigns, SNP leaders gave negative statements to this effect, suggesting that they support cooperation with the Hague Tribunal, that they are interested in criminal prosecution of war criminals, but that they do not support the extradition of Yugoslav citizens.

DOS leaders interpreted these statements as "campaigning" and that the SNP will change its mind, otherwise the federal coalition will be brought into question.  SNP leaders were insulted by such statements, announcing that they will not accept any blackmail.

On Tuesday, May 28, the meeting between represenatives of DOS and the Socialist People's Party of Montenegro lasted full four hours and did not yiled a compromise on the Hague issue.  The meeting concluded with Predrag Bulatovic's announcement that further consultations will follow, while Kostunica announced that discussions between representatives of DOS, SNP and NS will conclude in two days.  SNP set a meeting of its head council for Wendesday evening, given that SNP officials forced commitments from their representatives in the federal parliament for not accepting extradition of Yugoslav citizens.

According to Kostunica, DOS, SNP and NS representatives had very lengthy, but also very constructive and open discussions which will continue in further meetings in Montenegro, and that discussions mainly centered around the drafting of a text which would be acceptable to the federal government, at which point this law would be submitted to the Yugoslav parliament for passage.

LEGAL NIHILISM:  Kostunica was forced to endure strong pressures by the Hague Tribunal prosecutor Carla del Ponte who wanted "to get Milosevic" last winter in what could be described "legal nihilism" and ignoring of legal procedure.  In a way this trend was also taken up on the Yugoslav political scene.  The extradition of a foreign national was followed by comments that court procedure was ignored in that case with reagrd to court appeals.  It was only natural to expect that another path would be used, with our government getting help for legislative adaptation.  There was minimal cooperation in this, a copy of the draft found its way to the Hague, but this was attended by numerous misunderstandings, including the one according to which president Kostunica was not informed how the draft found its way there.

Thus Kostunica had difficulties in forcing this entire issue to be treated according to legislative procedure, given that it directly touches on matters of national sovereignity, prestige, national dignity, attitudes to war crimes, but also to national security.  (According to Croatian law, this issue has been significantly developed.  Hague investigators do not only insist on getting the accused and witnesses, but also access to documents and files.)

Of course, a very important factor in the recent developments on this front is the approaching donors conference on Yugoslavia (postponed for June 29), as well as the fact that American Senator Baiden intents to "lock horns with the Bush Administration" on the issue of Yugoslavia (expression used by Gerry Dempsey, a Balkan expert).

Yugoslavia does not have much space to maneuver, given that it is under strong international pressure to regulate its relations with the Hague Tribunal and that it is suspected of stalling on this issue through legal procedures.  Kostunica himself has been suspected of being "a moderate nationalist" and because of criticism which he directed toward this court.  Kostunica's criticism of the practice of the Hague prosecutor markedly frustrated her, with the result that she closely followed the Yugoslav delegation wherever it ventured in the world.

Finally, one of the effects on the atmosphere was suspicion by those who support the truth and making of peace that Yugoslav officials will not do what they are being asked to do.  The media also contributed to creating this atmposhere, with Carla del Ponte being in the headlines constantly.

The atmosphere was merely complicated by the post-October vacuum in which certain cercles that were left without a bone to pick following Milosevic's departure, began mechanically accusing the new government of "Milosevic's nationalism" and even "fascism."  Similar criticism came from supporters of Montenegro's independence, with some lobbyists for professional and moral crusades, who came with the attitude "let's go to war pacifists" as during the NATO bombing.

On the other hand, Serbian nationalist and intellectual circles, and some newly founded extremist groups attempted to perpetuate theories of world conspiracies and of the anti-Serb nature of the Tribunal.  The radicals are teh loudest in this regard.  The Socialist Party of Serbia follows close suit in presenting their leader as a victim.  Also real is the possibility that the police and army are slowly adopting the attitude that war heros are being tried, while traitors are being celebrated.  On the other hand, the criminal prosecution of members of the ex-regime is taking on more intense forms than in any of the ex-communist countries.  In this context the "conspiracy of silence" on war crimes is also being broken, which is reflected in the envestigation of concealed war crimes (the case of the refrigerated truck in the Danube), as well as announcements by the army and the police regarding investigations of crimes which were commited during the war.  The down side to all this is that   the new ministers, regardless of their portfolios and resources, drew on the issue of the Hague, of arrests, etc. - in short, lacking political culture, which is potentially dangerous when legislative authority begins behaving that way.

In this atmosphere in which the government has a better reputationthan its critics, it is necessary to overlook differences between DOS and the SNP which concern cooperation with the Hauge Tribunal, as well as differences with political partners who hold varying opinions.

SEED OF CONFUSION:  From one point of view, that night in the Yugoslav Parliament carried with it a seed of great confusion.  The unsuccessful consolidation of this discussion preceeds the forming of a new state.  If the DOS-SNP coalition breaks up, there will be not joint Yugoslav state.  If the SNP loses elections in Montenegro, again there will be no joint state.

Yugoslav Vice-President Miroljub Labus called a meeting of federal DOS ministers in order to report to them the stage of the discussions with the SNP and in order to consider with them possible solutions.  In fact, both coalition partners had separate meetings with their highest officials and members of federal government.

When asked whether lack of agreement between DOS and SNP could bring into question the survival of the Yugoslav federation, Labus responded by stating that the situation is not simple, that everything is being considered, but that he personally does nto think that the situation is so critical.  Kostunica also offers his interpretation of the fact that full agreement was not reached at that meeting on this delicate issue, that this does not threaten the survival of the federal government, because that survival would mean the survival of the state, "and the state is very feisty, despite all these trials."  Dragoljub Micunovic, president of the People's Chamber in the Yugoslav government noted that one of the points of dispute is who will be entrusted with extradition, whether it will be the federal or the Serbian minister of justice.  DOS is supposedly interested in adopting a federal law according to which Serbian and Montenegrin ministers would be authorized to execute it.

Otherwise the SNP proposed that this issue be regulated on the level of the republics, based on federal law.  DOS refused this with the explanation that this issue is under federal jurisdiction and that it will not be protected with such a move, but rather developed.

WAY OUT:  At the time that this article is going to print, the response from Montenegro's SNP is still not known, but a compromise could be expected, given that more important matters are being taken up between DOS and the SNP these days.  Since there is agreement on reform of the joint state, a working group has been formed with the objective of drafting a document on the organization of the federal state, in other words on redefining relations in Yugoslvia.  This group is made up of Dragoljub Micunovic, Zoran Zizic, Goran Svilanovic, Dragan Soc, Zoran Leposavic, Slobodan Samardzic and Zoran Lutovac.  If on June 2 they manage to begin succesfully the definition of a joint platform, that should be combined with negotiations with the coalition "Montenegrin Victory."

Following the meeting dedicated to the survival of the federation, Dragoljub Micunovic, President of the Federal People's Chamber, stated that "We have the key to the survival of Yugoslavia."  If this proves true, then the conflict on the issue of the Hague comes second place to an issue which must not be ignored by rational politicians.