Rufi Loses

Does the failure of the suit filed with the European Court in Strasbourg, in connection with the freedom of expression and assembly, in which the European court chose a very unpleasant definition of the activities and actions of Mr Rufi Osmani in connection with the "events in Gostivar", mark an inglorious end of the political career of the former mayor of Gostivar?

by S.O.

Forum, Skopje, Macedonia, December 28, 2001

On November 11, 2001, the European Human Rights Court in Strasbourg made the final decision with which the seven member judicial council, led by the president of the court N.L.Rosakis, rejected the suit filed by Mr. Rufi Osmani against the state of Macedonia. Mr. Osmani, represented by Brussels lawyer St. Leonard, initiated the suit on July 15, 1998. The suit was registered by the court on September 9, 1999.

History of Dispute

As is well known, the whole story goes back to the tumultuous days in Gostivar in May 1997. After the election of Osmani for the mayor of Gostivar in 1996, he initiated the decision of the town council adopted on February 14, 1997, which approved that Albanian and Turkish state flags be displayed together with the state flag in the Gostivar municipality. On May 21, 1997, the Constitutional Court of Macedonia issued a temporary injunction, which suspended this regulation and informed the local council in Gostivar about its decision the following day. Two days later, on May 22, Osmani organized a political rally in front of the town hall. At the rally, among other, he claimed that the Constitutional Court was illegitimate because "it flagrantly violates the constitution", he glorified the Albanian flag that "was flown by both partisans and Balli Combetar" units [Albanian fascists from WWII] "during the liberation of our territories". With nationalist zeal Osmani proclaimed that "our territories in Macedonia are our territories, and they should get it into their heads, once and for all, that the Albanian flag will fly over these territories forever".

Using threatening tone, hate speech, nationalist pathos and threats, Osmani by the end of his speech called for disobedience to the then government of Macedonia, transformation of Gostivar into an "Albanian town", regionalization of the state etc. He concluded that "the only court we (i.e. Osmani and his buddies, author's remark) respect is the court of the Albanian people".

On May 26, the Gostivar town council informed the Constitutional Court that it refused to implement the court's injunction, although by law it was obliged to do so. Then Osmani organized armed sentries for the protection of the flag, which was described by the European court as "exceeding his mayoral powers". "Later," the court in Strasbourg concluded, "continuing to act outside his competencies as a mayor and violating the law, he (Osmani) established a central crisis headquarters with several regional outposts. A list of citizens of ethnic Albanian origin was compiled. These citizens were given special duties and financial resources were allocated for specific activities, such as propaganda and communications, shelters for injured individuals, etc."

On June 6, attempting to exert pressure on the Constitutional Court of Macedonia, the "citizen" (as the European Court in Strasbourg refers to Osmani) warned the Constitutional Court that the temporary injunction issued by the court on May 21 would incite inter-ethnic conflict in the municipality. That did not stop the Constitutional Court from abolishing with its decision, reached on June 11, 1997, article 140 of the Statute of the Gostivar municipality, which regulated the way in which flags should be displayed. The Constitutional Court justified its decision by stating that the Gostivar municipal council had no right to regulate such things.

On July 9, early in the morning, Police removed the flags hoisted in front of the town hall in Gostivar. The Court in Strasbourg, referring to the official police reports, concluded that the police found illegal firearms in its search of the town hall. Some of the weaponry was found in the mayor's office.

Somewhat later, that morning, a group of about 200 persons attacked the police, using among other Molotov cocktails. This group was dispersed, but a few hours later another 7000 to 8000 persons gathered and again attacked the police, using smoke grenades. The crowd was shouting "Bosnia, Bosnia". Shots were fired by both sides. One policeman was seriously wounded, while two demonstrators were killed in unclear circumstances. Three Albanian nationals were among the arrested demonstrators. During the arrest, thirty bottles with prepared Molotov cocktails were found on them. At about 5 pm, after residents of Gostivar were addressed by "citizen Osmani" via the local TV station, the police established full control of the town. During the searches of various buildings and offices, the police found illegal weapons (including machine guns), documentation about the organization of "crisis headquarters", as well as huge amounts of medications and other medical equipment needed in case of an armed conflict. During the search of the Osmani's house, the police found three illegal handguns, as well as lists of persons with various logistic and military tasks. The result of the clashes were three dead and more than 200 seriously or lightly injured citizens and policemen.

Unpleasant Analysis

The European Human Rights Court then engaged in a long and detailed analysis of the judicial proceedings against Osmani conducted by the lower court in Gostivar, the procedure in front of the Appeals court and the Supreme Court in Skopje. In the end of the analysis (which together with the translation to the Macedonian language, exceeds 30 pages), the European Court also mentions that Mr. Osmani was paroled and released after serving one year and three months in prison.

After a long analysis of the judicial proceedings, evidence, actions of the prosecution and the defense, and issued sentences, as well as parallel analysis of the Macedonian criminal law and constitution, the court in Strasbourg concluded that the whole procedure was legal and rejected "citizen Osmani's" appeal against the verdicts. Considering whether Osmani was a "victim" of the Macedonian judiciary, the court in Strasbourg concluded that "the fact that the plaintiff (Osmani) was paroled, does not imply that his sentence was illegal..." The court in Strasbourg also concluded that "in this case the plaintiff was guilty of inciting racial and religious hatred, conflict and intolerance as an official, given that he organized a public gathering on May 24, 1997, under the motto 'defense of the official use of the national flag', at which the national anthem of the republic of Albania was played and at which the plaintiff called on the citizens to defend the national flag of the Republic of Albania".

The Human Rights Court believes that in the given case the state did limit Osmani's right to free peaceful assembly, guaranteed by the International human rights convention. However, the court also found that "the law obliged the state to limit the right to free peaceful assembly", as "the court believes that article 319 of the criminal law constitutes sufficient basis for finding the plaintiff guilty". "This article," the European Court concluded, "is sufficiently specific and the plaintiff could envisage and predict the consequences of his actions to a satisfactory degree."

And what about Osmani's "actions"? This is how the European court describes them: "In given circumstances, the court is convinced that the involvement of the state was motivated by several legitimate goals, such as prevention of disturbances and crimes, national and public safety, and protection of freedoms and rights of others". In the given case, the state had the right to protect national security, public safety, the rights of others and prevent disturbances by taking criminal-legal measures against the plaintiff. Local courts provided sufficient justification to find the plaintiff guilty and to sentence him," states the court in Strasbourg. However, it also adds: "besides, given the fact that the plaintiff served only one year and three months of his prison sentence, his sentence was proportional to the legitimate goals of the authorities in this case".

Verdict

In the final part of its verdict the court explains that the respect of the right to free peaceful assembly and freedom of expression "is important for everyone, but is especially important for legally elected officials" such as Osmani. "Some parts of the speech by the plaintiff delivered at the protest rally of ethnic Albanian citizens encouraged violence," the court states, reminding that, despite being aware of the "risk of public disturbances, disorder, and conflict with the police," Osmani organized and incited his fellow citizens to clash with the police. "The court believes that the speech by the plaintiff, his actions and the rally he organized on May 24, 1997, without doubt significantly contributed to the violent events that took place on May 26, and July 9, 1997." Osmani "directly called on the ethnic Albanian citizens to resist the implementation of the final court verdict, by which he provoked hatred, intolerance, and tensions in a rather sensitive inter-ethnic situation, as well as feelings of insecurity among the non-Albanian population and stirred painful memories of the WWII." Finally, the European court decided that "judicial measures taken by the local (Macedonian, author's remark) courts correspond to 'necessary societal needs' and that the local authorities sufficiently justified the guilt of the plaintiff" (Osmani).

Regarding the appropriateness of the sentence, after an analysis, the European court concluded: "the plaintiff spent one year and three months in prison. Therefore, even though the first verdict was harsh (eight years in prison, reduced after appeal to four years, author's remark), one year and three months in prison cannot be considered for a disproportionally harsh sentence, keeping in mind the details of the case." "Therefore, the complaint of the plaintiff (Osmani) that his rights to freedom of expression and assembly were violated is baseless(...). Consequently, the court, based on a majority decision, rejects the appeal."

* * *

What can we say about this verdict from Strasbourg, which closes an important and sad chapter of recent history of Macedonia?

First, there is no place for gloating for either side. People died, others were lightly or seriously injured, property was destroyed... Political radicalism and extremism of a mayor, among other, was clearly condemned by an independent European institution, in a case initiated by him.

Secondly, if the European justice were faster, and local extremism slower, perhaps the events of this year would not have taken place.

Thirdly, it is clear that such a clear decision of the European Human Rights Court cannot prevent various local fools from calling for armed defense of flags, anthems, "universities" and someone else's political careers. Unfortunately, young people will keep dying for such goals.

Finally, perhaps the best consequence of all this will be if at least citizen Rufi Osmani in the future remains out of politics, since, as we could see, not only from his case, how much damage and victims can be caused by irresponsible nationalist policies in the Balkans. If can serve for solace for Mr. Osmani, irresponsible politicians of his sort can be found among Macedonians as well. The departure of such Macedonian politicians would be an occasion for a celebration, indeed.

Translated on July 19, 2002