by Snjezana MULIC-BUSATLIJA
Karikin's agreement in principle to defend his own butcher was greeted by the domestic public with consternation. But, regardless of how much this news may seem unbelievable, it was not unexpected. Namely, Karikin likes to say for himself that he is a "career lawyer" and he has even earlier become infamous because of his readiness to defend even devil himself. Before the war he defended Krajisnik and Karadzic in the scandal relating to the embezzlement of money in Invest-inzenjering, during the war he was the advisor of the commander of the Sarajevo Military Police, Ismet Bajramovic Celo, a link between Alija Izetbegovic and Krajisnik and between the International Red Cross and commissions for exchanges. He personally experienced life in prison as the wartime authorities accused him in November 1993 for as many as 124 crimes, including the cooperation with the aggressor, and sentenced him to five years in prison. At the time there were rumors about theft of $1.7 million, but that was not mentioned in the indictment, and Karikin served 18 months and two days of his prison sentence. At the moment Karikin is defending Croat Dominik Ilijasevic Como, accused of war crimes, and adds that as early as September 1999 he stated that he would defend even Radovan Karadzic if he requested so.
I was a victim, I am not a victim anymore: "I respect professional standards," repeats Karikin and apparently wants to anticipate the unavoidable question: Why did he not refuse to provide assistance to the man who for four years sent death for him and his family? Or perhaps, he is trying to impose the idea that he had to accept the request.
True, the ethical codex of the Bar Association of Bosnia-Hercegovina states that a lawyer is obliged to provide legal assistance to all those who approach him. But the same codex also states that a lawyer can refuse to provide assistance and in that case should inform the Bar Association about the reasons for his refusal.
Did Karikin, when criminal Krajisnik phoned him from Scheveningen and requested assistance, hesitate for at least a moment? Did he have dilemmas, did he have to think it over, did he request for more time to think whether he would be able to defend the criminal without recalling at least his own plight in the surrounded city? These are only some of the questions we asked him. However, like a skillful lawyer, he left them without a direct answer: "I was a victim, but I will not defend Krajisnik as a victim, but as a lawyer. I was a victim in the war. Krajisnik and his defense team phoned me and I agreed in principle. I will defend Krajisnik in the Hague following my official duty. If I refused, I would have understood that as an obstruction of the Hague Tribunal. You see, I am a believer, I am a member of the Rifaiye Dervish order, which says that we should remember but not take revenge," said Karikin.
But, even though the Hague Implementation Criminal Law is almost entirely unknown in Bosnia-Hercegovina, it is nevertheless known that the Tribunal cannot on its own recruit defense lawyers but merely approves their recruitment after a proposal by the defendant. Even that approval is given only after numerous procedures and even a check of the solvency of the defense attorney. Therefore, the Tribunal could not have forced Karikin to defend Krajisnik, as he later admitted: "When I give Krajisnik my final agreement, I will get an approval from the Tribunal.".
There is no doubt that the case is viewed as intriguing by his colleagues lawyers. Although most of them told us that they had heard about the case, but are not very interested, it is not over the top to claim that Karikin's move will serve them very well as a trial balloon.
Personal Choice: We requested comments on the case Karikin from the lawyers from the never established Bar Association of Bosnia-Hercegovina, the Legal Bar of the Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna, and the Bar Association of the Republic of Srpska. We also asked them whether they would accept a similar case.
Josip Muselimovic, a well-known lawyer from Mostar, claims that there are no legal obstacles for Mr. Karikin's defense of Krajisnik, nor is that forbidden in the attorney's ethical codex. "If someone secretly comes near my home and carries out all the preparations to at one moment kill myself, my family and my neighbors, I would not be able to defend that person. One thing is certain: I would not be able to defend General Momcilo Perisic, the man who turned my hometown Mostar into powder and ashes from the surrounding hills," says Muselimovic and wonders how come it was ignored that article 65 of the Law about Criminal Procedure bans the victim from being a defender.
His colleague from Mostar, lawyer Berislav Vlaho has a completely different view of the case: "Why should I not defend someone accused, for example, for the crime committed in Grabovica? I would, very gladly, because I am a professional," says this lawyer and adds that at the moment he is working on the case of five Bosniaks condemned for crimes committed in Mostar.
Milorad Ivosevic is the president of the Governing Board of the Bar Association of the Republic of Srpska. He claims that he would definitely defend a Bosniak or a Croat accused of war crimes if they requested that from him and emphasizes that ethical rules oblige a lawyer to accept defense, but that does not imply that a lawyer is supposed to identify with his defendant. His colleague Borisa Ilic, a lawyer from Doboj, shares that opinion. "I would accept without hesitation the role of a defense attorney of a Bosniak or Croat accused of war crimes," Ilic stated for Dani.
Vasvija Vidovic already has experiences with the Hague Tribunal. Because of the fact that she personally worked on the collection of documentation and evidence with the Hague Prosecutor, she cannot work as a defense attorney in front of the Tribunal. But, says Ms. Vidovic, as someone who spent the whole war in Sarajevo and experienced all the horrors, she would never accept to defend either Krajisnik or any other criminal. As far as Karikin is concerned, she believes that that is the mater of his own choice: "Everyone has the right to defense, including Krajisnik. Consequently, I think that Karkin did not do anything wrong when he agreed to defend him," Vasvija Vidovic said.
Zarko Bulic the president of the bar Association of Bosnia-Hercegovina, would also never defend Krajisnik, and he did not want to comment on Karikin's action, just like his colleague Ekrem Galijatovic, the president of the Governing Board of the Bar Association of Bosnia-Hercegovina. Galijatovic only said that Karikin did not violate any professional norms.
Only Krajisnik knows: Some lawyers consider themselves extremely lucky for staying out of criminal law. Consequently they cannot be approached by some krajisnik. They include lawyers Fahrudin Teftedarija and Dzemil Sabrihafizovic. They, just like other colleagues agree that Karikin did not make a professional sin.
Sabrihafizovic shared with us a very interesting view: "I know that Karikin has the reputation of a very successful lawyer and only Krajisnik knows why he contacted him. I believe that even Karikin does not know true Krajisnik's motivation."
Really, what is Krajisnik's and what Karikin's motivation? Karikin immediately dispelled suspicion that Krajisnik was playing the ethnic card: "I think that that is nonsense. His motivation is that I am an excellent lawyer." As far as his motivation is concerned, he rejects our suspicion that he is seeking vengeance against the local authorities that sent him to prison and claims that the most important reason is professional challenge, the second one money. Namely, if he joins the defense team, his hourly pay would be $110. It is expected that the trial against Krajisnik will last between five and eight thousand hours!
Edah Becirbegovic formerly a very famous lawyer, and today a judge on the Human Rights Court believes, as the other colleagues, that from the point of view of legal ethics Karikin's action does not deserve criticism. However, he would never agree to defend Krajisnik: "I could not in clear conscience defend a man that I would personally condemn. My subjective outrage at that man would not allow me to defend him properly. If Fahrija can overcome that, then let him defend Krajisnik."
Karikin already admitted for Dani that the fact that he himself was among the victims of Krajisnik's crimes did not make it difficult to defend him. "Although I was a victim, I was a victim during the war," curtly responded Karikin. However, the question is whether he will be able, and where he will find arguments that could benefit Krajisnik.
Karikin had the reply to this question as well: "Unfortunately, the indictment has not been published yet. If it had, you would have been able to see that it does not contain Srebrenica, Zepa, the worst stench."
Contamination of BH Soil: Sarajevo lawyer Ahmed Zilic says that in the "clash" between the codex of the legal profession and the "codex" of the nation he follows the ethical judgment that one should above all be a lawyer and only then a Bosniak, a Serb or a Croat. According to him, the "codex" of the "guild" should to everyone be above the codex of the "nation", and that is the best way to strengthen one's nation. Zilic did not directly reply whether he would agree to defend a war criminal: "In spite of my understanding for moral dilemmas prompted by this 'case' in the BH public, I would defend the right of every lawyer to professionally defend interests of his client. Unfortunately, this system of values to the large extent is opposed to the concepts of professional interpreter of the interests of the 'nation', and even 'religion', who successfully contaminate Bosnia-Hercegovina and the wider region with their defense of the values of 'nation, religion, and soil'. I view 'Karikin's or Bosniak defense of Krajisnik' as another political manipulation of the BH public and yet another well projected reversal of arguments constructed in moronic political party security-intellectual factories."
What is the view of the so-called Bosniak institutions regarding this case? Arif Purivatra, the president of the Council of the Congress of Bosniak Intellectuals, believes that it is necessary to make a distinction between one's professional duty and personal views, political, religious, cultural... "I think that it is normal that Karikin follows the principles of his profession, moreover because in this matter the issue is the truth and justice. I believe that regardless of the elements related to lawyer's ideological, political or religious affiliation, a lawyer must first observe professional principles. That is a contribution to the achievement of human rights and rule of law."
The Statute of the Bar Association of Bosnia-Hercegovina at one spot says that A lawyer can refuse to provide legal assistance if due to personal conviction he is convinced that he would not be able to successfully conclude the case.
But even that does not apply to Fahrija Karikin. He accepted the offer, which means that soon we could see him trying to convince the jury that Krajisnik is innocent. To the question whether, if he proves that, God forbid, Krajisnik is innocent, he would feel guilty, Karikin responds: "First, I will base the defense on facts, and secondly, I can tell you that there are many people I defended and of whose guilt I was convinced and they were acquitted, and even more of those in whose innocence I was convinced and they were condemned."
Karikin adds that he will listen to the public concern, friends and family, and only then make the final decision. Therefore, those who still feel like Krajisnik's victims can only pray to God that the voice of the public may dissuade Karikin, or that Karikin manages to convince himself that Krajisnik is innocent.
Muhamed Nuhic, a professor at the Political Science department of the Sarajevo University: "First it is necessary to look into lawyer's codex. Is the lawyer obliged to accept to defend and how that duty corresponds to his conscience? If I were a lawyer, I would ignore the lawyer's codex, because professional rules of a profession cannot cancel general, well-known and through history confirmed ethical norms."
Senad Pandic, a student: "From the professional point of view, I approve, but from ethical point of view I do not. On the one hand that defense job allows him to make a lot of money, but on the other hand, form ethical point of view that is not acceptable."
Fikreta Almanovic, a janitor in the First High School: "I would hang Karikin!"
Senad Dupovac, a trader: "He is either defending him for the money, or Krajisnik has damaging information about Karikin."
Muharem Jusufbegovic, a locksmith: "He was his lawyer before; they later parted their ways; Karikin is merely doing his job; I neither approve nor disprove what he is doing."
Jasminka Mutevelic, a teacher: "Let Karikin defend him; but he should be given a just sentence for his crimes."
Elmin Zeba, a student: "The man is doing his job. Most likely, his main motivation to agree to defend Krajisnik is money. If I were in his shoes, I would not defend such a criminal, but, having in mind the current situation in BH, if they asked me, the man with two cents in his pocket, I would agree to defend even Adolf Hitler. Unfortunately."
Alka Sevala, a newspaper seller: "That is abnormal. The war was horrible, all of that was horrible; but this to happen, that he defend him, that does not make sense. He has the right to do that as a lawyer, that is his job, but...?!"
Zehida K., a housewife: "That is abnormal. He should not defend a Chetnik [a Serb], having in mind what they did to us during the war. If he does that, Karikin should also be prosecuted in the Hague!"
Vera D., a salesperson: "I think that he should not defend any war criminals."
Nina Zuvela, a student: "I think that everyone has the right to be defended, but as a lawyer, I would not defend him, having in mind everything we've been through. Karikin was himself in Sarajevo and experienced all of that as well."
Poll conducted by L.Gutlic and M.Lepusina