Both collocutors agreed that war is behind us, and that "normalization of relations has no alternative". Our fates are linked, because "the sooner Croatia joins the EU and NATO, the sooner will Serbia-Montenegro join as well". The signing of the Minority Protection Agreement is not the only proof that something of historical importance took place during the first official visit of a Croatian Prime Minister to Belgrade - we also had first autumn snow. As if heavens wanted to remind us of the old saying "snow does not fall to cover the hill, but for beasts to show their tracks". And now it turns out that everything we were not able to resolve on our own while living in the same state, including the failure to conduct a civilized divorce, must be done in a new marriage, this time under watchful eyes of Big Mamma Europe.
If fate and numbers have their way we could end up under the same roof perhaps in 2010, exactly 20 years after the start of the Knin "log revolution". Even if it takes place a year or two later, and does not fall on a round figure, we shall start new life in the same state significantly poorer than when we parted our ways. Although the ambassador of Croatia in Belgrade, Toni Stanicic, claims that the relations between the two states are "today better than ever" we shall feel for a long time emotional consequences of the war that will remain an obstacle to normal coexistence even for the coming generations.
However, it's time to cross the river - we must reach values on which united Europe is based. The European Union is a world power and the all-encompassing globalization process makes existence outside it impossible in this region. Behind we leave thousands of dead, hundreds of thousands of physically and emotionally crippled, displaced, missing... We are poorer by billions of dollars and richer by fields sown with land mines and tycoons who have sucked out the little blood left after the war. Also, the Hague cache holds respectable national teams of war criminals who will compete for prestigious spots in the European encyclopedia of mass murderers of the 20th century. Its authors, our European unifiers, will address the question of victim and aggressor based on the number of lexicographic units in that textbook, as they are much more concerned with the protection of their capital, with which they cheaply bought us, than with the historical truth.
The only person smiling in his grave is probably Miroslav Krleza [arguably the greatest Croatian writer of all times], who at one point asked to be saved from "Serb heroism and Croat culture". Really, Krleza, who pushed us apart?
Thus, Gurovic did not arrive in Zagreb because he refused to cover Draza with a band-aid or something similar, but Galic's Cathedral of Spirit [state-controlled Croatian TV] welcomed in its show "On Sunday at 2" former minister in one of Slobodan Milosevic's governments Aleksandar Tijanic who glorified the abovementioned Mihajlovic in the program without hindrance asserting that "to say the least, it is questionable whether Mihajlovic was a fascist". In this case the Croatian Police did not dare sanction instigation of "religious, national and racial hatred", although the incident took place in front of hundreds of thousands of TV viewers, so that the former journalist freely walked away down Zagreb streets. It's difficult to figure out how Mlinaric's policemen differentiate Gurovic's from Tijanic's attitude with respect to Mihajlovic given that they apply identical laws in exactly opposite manner in these two cases. It is even less certain what they will do in connection with the forthcoming visit of the foreign minister of Serbia-Montenegro, Vuk Draskovic, to Croatia. The minister from Serbia may not carry a tattoo of Draza Mihajlovic on his arm, but Mihajlovic is his idol so that he tries to copy his appearance while he has proven "instigation of hatred" consistently since his novel "Knife", until today.
The police ban of Gurovic's entry to Croatia did not further the rule of law in this country, but most likely did help "Cibona" win its game as well as the Police to avoid the shame of not being able to protect the guests on and off the basketball court. Consequently, in Gurovic's case the police pulled out legislation that is not consistently applied in local use, as can be clearly seen in the streets where street vendors unhindered hawk Ustashe memorabilia, as well as at Tomphson's concerts. Thus, during Racan's government's tenure the police in Split initiated an investigation looking for persons who wrote in Kastel Luksic two graffiti saying "Long Live Saddam Hussein!" We can be certain that there would not be any reaction provided the graffiti said "Long Live George Bush!".
When last year Croatian top competitive skier Ivica Kostelic said that he felt as prepared as German soldiers getting ready to attack Soviet Union in 1941, even "Glas Koncila" [official magazine of the Catholic Church in Croatia] stood in his defense, defending him as an ideal Croat although the reaction of the all powerful church would have been different had he compared himself, for example, to a Soviet soldier defending Stalingrad.
The definition of hatred among Croats has always depended on its target. Perhaps in the struggle against undesirable tattoos we should follow Fr. Andjelko Kacunak's advice and stick to voodoo?
by S. KLARICA
According to the main organizer of the celebration in the Monastery, hieromonk Fr. Gavrilo, immediately after learning that one of the official security personnel wore a black T-shirt with the Cyrillic inscription "With faith in God - Freedom or Death!", which is a motto of Ravna Gora Chetniks, the ambassador of Serbia-Montenegro in Croatia, Milan Simurdic, reacted yesterday morning and demanded an explanation from the bishop of Dalmatia Fotije. The bishop in turn immediately contacted Fr. Gavrilo, so that he could explain to the Croatian public circumstances that led to the incident.
"When the workers of the Zadar Institute for Protection of Cultural Heritage, who are reconstructing the monastery, came this morning and showed me the newspaper article I was so shocked that I nearly passed out. The person who did that above all committed a crime against the Krupa Monastery. Listen, above all, I, the organizer of the gathering, condemn the action of that young man as a shameful act. I shall personally try to find out his name and address and pass that information to the police," Fr. Gavrilo spoke agitatedly at the Monastery.
By the way, the official guard was photographed only five meters from the entrance to the monastery church, in front of which there were numerous faithful at the time. Nearby there were also Serb political representatives in Croatia, including the deputy mayor of Kistanje Ilija Krneta. However, none of them reacted while the young man, unhindered, even showing off, walked around for more than an hour and a half, finally settling down at the "sentry post" near the entrance to the small monastery cemetery. Moreover, numerous policemen, who were also nearby, also failed to react.
Fr. Gavrilo, however, says that the young man was not a member of the official security detail for the celebration. "Security asked me to add him to the list, because I had two blank security IDs, without a stamp; head of security was Nand Tojsic, a student from Bosnia. It's most likely that that young man had also come from Bosnia, which is now difficult to check, because all of them left after the end of the celebration," Fr. Gavrilo explains.
As far as he is concerned, this event is especially grave because the Serbian Orthodox Church decorated on the occasion of this religious holiday the Croatian Police and the local authorities in Obrovac.
By the way, police inspectors from Zadar, in charge of criminal deeds, have questioned Fr. Gavrilo, in order to identify the young man who wore the T-shirt with Chetnik symbols. Since the Croatian government has only a few days ago proposed that the Criminal law be modified to cover display of inappropriate symbols from the past, we were informed by the police that they will decide what to do after consultation with other state institutions.
interview by Boris PAVELIC
NOVI LIST: In your opinion, is the Croatian judiciary capable of prosecuting Hague indictments?
JOSIPOVIC: Generally speaking, yes. However, practice so far indicates that such assertions should be made with caution. Namely, there are courts and judges who can, and those who can't. I think that the establishment of separate war crimes courts was a good decision that will make it possible to move those trials if it becomes obvious that some courts are not able to properly try similar cases.
What is the basic problem?
There are different problems. In some cases judges were unwilling to properly try those cases. Of course, there are judges who are not well versed in that branch of law, but that could be corrected with additional education. There are also problems of factual nature: it is obvious that crimes took place, but at this point it is impossible to collect evidence. When an indictment fails in court - there is a crime, but no perpetrator - that is frustrating, but it does not necessarily indicate that the court is always to blame. Among other, it should be seen whether the indictment was well prepared by the police and prosecution.
Yes, of course. The Croatian legal system opens up possibilities for that as well, naturally, assuming that there is appropriate political and legal will. It makes sense that international law insists more on responsibility of those who in their influential and powerful positions planed and prepared crimes, than of those who carried out the crimes. Croatia has instruments to prosecute all criminal acts from the jurisdiction of the Hague Tribunal, except the abovementioned, extremely limited portion related to command responsibility.
But, the Hague prosecutor never issues indictments exclusively for that mode of criminal act. However, it is very important that Croatia carefully assesses whether it can carry out a particular prosecution to its end. If it is believed that it can not, then such indictments should not be accepted.
That is possible?
Yes. But, there are very few such cases. Therefore, in general I would say that Croatia can prosecute Hague Tribunal indictments, and if a case that could not be prosecuted to its end crops up such a case should not be accepted. That is better than to accept a case and later claim that we do not have instruments for such a trial.
The Witness Protection Act has been enacted, but Croatia still hasn't mastered that field. Our problem is that in big and serious cases we can do very little on our own, simply due to the fact that Croatia is too small a country to hide someone well here. Consequently, we need cooperation with other countries. I know that we are intensively working on witness protection programs and education of those who should be in charge of such programs.
Other experts are much more skeptical regarding the ability of Croatia to punish war crimes, not only because of unwillingness of judges to issue such sentences, but also because procedural rules in the Croatian judiciary differ significantly from those employed by the Hague Tribunal?
That is true, they are different, but the new law has introduced the possibility of accepting evidence presented by the Hague Tribunal, given that the evidence is presented to a trial chamber of that tribunal. However, everyone must understand that Croatian courts, just like any other courts, will be free to give their assessment of the evidence collected by the Hague Tribunal. Even the Hague Tribunal has given different assessments of the same evidence. It should not be expected that Croatian courts will automatically accept all evidence.
By all means. However, trials must be conducted according to the form of the Croatian judicial procedure. In that we should take into account different judicial nature of their and our investigation. For example, if Croatia receives documentation, it will be passed on to the state prosecutor, and he will "introduce" it as specified by the Criminal Trial Law. However, it could not happen that the prosecutor receive somebody's statement and that it is used just like that as evidence. Such a witness would as a rule have to appear in court, just the way he or she would have to testify in the Hague. I don't see why that would be problematic.
In November the parliament adopted the Application of the Statue of the International Criminal Tribunal and Prosecution of Crimes Against International Wartime and Humanitarian Law Act. What does that law make possible?
It actually has to do with two tribunals: primarily the newly formed International Criminal Tribunal, in the part that deals with war crimes in general, and criminal acts from the jurisdiction of the Hague Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. That law addresses several important issues. First, it introduces a special state prosecutor for war crimes in the rank of deputy state prosecutor, but with increased jurisdiction over state attorneys in the field.
Despite all these preparations, Croatian courts have so far failed in prosecution of war crimes, and not only those carried out against Serbs?
There have been numerous trials, an overwhelming majority of which, apart from only a few exceptions, were against Serb defendants. Unfortunately, the purpose of some of these cases was to discourage return [of Serb refugees], and not to apply law and satisfy justice. The large number of cancelled indictments and annulled sentences, as well as observations of local and international organizations dealing with protection of human rights all confirm that. On the other hand, prosecutions of Croats did not cover all cases in which it was obvious that crimes took place.
Absolutely. That Tribunal faces a deadline; investigations will be concluded by the end of this year, and given how slowly they work it is obvious that only a few trials will be concluded by 2010. In such circumstances it makes sense to finalize only the most important cases in the Hague and transfer the rest to local courts. In that, even after the end of the work of the Hague Tribunal, the international community will very carefully monitor whether trials are conducted fairly.
Does that not constitute a failure of justice?
Yes it does, but justice also has a practical aspect. Because, what is the alternative? To bury the court with indictments and never complete any trials? Law is a rational category, which, unfortunately, never and nowhere provides absolute justice. Thus, the same will happen in this case.
by D. MIKOLA
It is not difficult to imagine how the whole thing would have ended if one of the attackers carried a weapon.
Namely, Croat soccer fans on Thursday, under the impression of a good soccer game in which Rapaic and Prso played main roles, clashed with the family of Nikola Bezbradica. And while some claim that Nikola and his family were attacked by about 20 fans, only because they are Serbs, other say that Nikola provoked them by flashing a Serb three-finger salute at them and that his family fought with only two fans. Hopefully, the police will find out what really happened, although, obviously, it needs quite a lot of time for that, as it has been searching for the truth for more than a week, as if it were dealing with a complicated murder mystery.
This incident must not be dismissed as "usual" soccer fan rage, as a middle-aged woman, and an eighty-year-old man were injured in the fight, while an eight-year-old child witnessed the incident. It would have been nice if merry and probably tipsy supporters of the Croatian national soccer team saw in that kid a future Prso or Rapaic who will score goals for Croatia, instead of beating his mother and grandfather.
However, Croatia will have to wait for such thoughts because 'round here children are doomed to pay for the sins of their fathers, grandfathers, great-grandfathers, or even those who just happen to have the same ethnicity as they. Thus, they stand a better chance that after a national team game someone beat up their family than, as the last year's incident in Vukovar clearly demonstrated, together with children from other ethnic groups participate in a soccer tournament.