LOCAL PRESS

 

Gasic: Serbia continuing policy of military neutrality (RTS/Tanjug)

Serbia will continue conducting the policy of military neutrality and will cooperate with all the partners in the east and the west, said Serbian Defense Minister Bratislav Gasic in talks with the Russian Ambassador to Serbia Aleksandr Chepurin. It was stressed that Serbia took a principled stand on the respect of territorial integrity of all the UN member-states and on the fact that dialogue is the best solution for overcoming all the disputes and problems. Gasic stressed that special focus during Serbia’s OSCE presidency would be laid on resolving current crises. The two agreed that bilateral military cooperation in 2014 had been very successful.

 

Djuric: We need to know who owns what (Danas, by Snezana Congradin)

“Over the past days we have been intensively dealing with the protection of law, even justice if you will, in the Trepca case and we are fully devoted to finding a solution in the Belgrade-Pristina dialogue, because this dialogue is the only place where such issues are resolved, wherever it is conducted – in Brussels, Belgrade, Pristina,” the Head of the Office for Kosovo and Metohija Marko Djuric tells Danas.

You harshly denied Danas’ reports that the solution for Trepca will be compensation for Serbia. Considering that Danas’ source is from the top leadership, does this mean there is division in the government regarding this issue?

“The Serbian government is absolutely united regarding Trepca, Kosovo and Metohija and all other issues. Everybody could be convinced with the joint press conference held by four Serbian government ministers and three provincial ministers regarding Trepca and all statements by these and other ministers in the public regarding this issue afterwards. Not only is there unison on the policy towards Trepca and Kosovo and Metohija in the government, but for the first time among our ministers and MPs in the provincial institutions. We can best see on the example of Trepca the results of Belgrade’s clear and united policy since 2012 towards Kosovo and the decision to encourage the Serbs to participate in the provincial government and thus directly influence the resolution of daily problems of the Serb community.”

Does Serbia have a plan for resolving the problem of ownership over Trepca? If it does, why is it being hidden from the public?

“Property and right of ownership must be sacred. The story about the status is one thing, while it is another thing what is somebody’s ownership and there is no dilemma here – Trepca is the ownership of companies from Serbia, the ownership of the Republic of Serbia and citizens who built it. The deposits are largely located on the territory of Serbia proper and 80 percent of the ore that was drawn out from Trepca in the last quarter was drawn out beneath this part of Serbia.”

Will the manner of resolving the problem be exclusively a political agreement in Brussels?

“It is very important to open the talks on property as soon as possible. Within them we should discuss not only the position of Trepca but of all economic entities in Kosovo and Metohija and their ownership structure. The known fact is that in Kosovo, unfortunately, the privatization has been conducted since 1999 in which 40,000 Serb employees were left not only without jobs, but also without the right to any kind of compensation from the process of this privatization. At issue is one crucial and historical injustice that delves into personal rights of the people who had been creating this capital with their life engagement. On the other side, in order to improve the investment environment in Kosovo, in order to provide long term stability, it is necessary to answer the question who owns what. As long as you have two groups of people on such small territory who have a different view on who is the titular of the property, one cannot expect the improvement of a broader economic environment.”

If Brussels supports Pristina, will Serbia discontinue the dialogue?

“That is a hypothetical question. This government has taken over the obligation to remain devoted to the resolution of problems in the province through dialogue. By responsibly approaching the encompassing normalization of Belgrade-Pristina relations, we adhered to the fact that solutions do not lie in unilateral moves. We can achieve progress only if we find solutions with Pristina, by jointly agreeing on the future.”

Will the Serbian government advise the Serb municipalities where the companies are located not to give consent for them to be transferred to Kosovo’s ownership?

“The coalition agreement on the formation of the Kosovo government envisages that significant jurisdictions in the privatization be given to municipalities. This is very important for the survival and future of the Serb community in Kosovo and Metohija, because it opens the possibility for Serb businessmen to accelerate economic activity, purchase agricultural cooperatives, plants and other economic collectives that operate in all Serb-majority regions. There are two goals: one is to revitalize the economy, and the other is to prevent, if you wish me to say so, change of ethnic structure of some municipalities. In the past, as a rule, after taking away some plant, the structure of the population also changed, new owners built housing units and moved people from other parts of Kosovo. Of course, one of the key prerogatives of the Union of Serb Municipalities should be the possibility for it to be the titular of property, and that is how prerequisites of economic sustainability will be created, because part of state and public companies will be in the service of the union.”

Why is compensation a bad solution?

“Our government is fighting painstakingly and successfully, despite all difficulties, in order to protect what is ours. Perhaps you should search for the answer to that question in northern Kosovo, in the Crnica and Belo Brdo tunnels, with 3,300 miners who are going down into the pit every morning in order to feed their families, and to ask them there about that proposal and who owns Trepca.”

With what do you guarantee that within a certain time, even within several years, compensation will not be a solution?

“Since 2012, the Serbian government is conducting a responsible policy towards Kosovo and Metohija and isn’t planning to abandon this direction for a single inch.”

There are allegations that with such an approach, the government is trying to maintain an illusion on the fact that Kosovo is not in fact independent.

“I cannot agree with your ascertainment on illusions and similar terminology that we are hearing from Pristina. Kosovo and Metohija is part of the Republic of Serbia and that is how it will stay. But with the dialogue with the provincial authorities we must influence the normalization of relations in the southern Serbian province and improvement of basic living conditions.”

We will not agree on the status for decades

It is clear that Serbia will not formally recognize Kosovo, but it is also clear that it is trying with the Brussels agreement to stabilize the situation and establish normal relations with Kosovo. How far are you prepared to go and endanger this process when it comes to this topic?

“The Serbian government will insist and will continue to be turned towards resolving all problems in the province through dialogue. It is high time that we deal jointly and responsibly with those topics that will normalize relations and improve conditions for daily co-existence of all citizens of Kosovo and Metohija. The fact that we don’t agree on the status and that we will not agree for decades probably doesn’t mean that we should not build all conditions to live normally with each other.”

 

SRS submits petition for removal of Nikolic (RTS/Tanjug)

The non-parliamentary Serbian Radical Party (SRS) submitted a petition to the Serbian parliament Friday calling for removal of Tomislav Nikolic from the position of Serbian president. The SRS leader Vojislav Seselj told reporters outside the parliament that he would not expect the parliament’s majority to endorse such an initiative, but the submission of the signatures had been a way for the party to point to a violation of the Constitution by the Serbian president. “Today is a holiday for the SRS, as the party was established on this day 25 years ago, and we wanted to celebrate this holiday by submitting signatures for replacement of Tomislav Nikolic,” Seselj said. Seselj believes that “Nikolic must be removed because he violated the Constitution by accepting the Brussels agreement,” and also because of his “graduating in an illegal manner, and placing himself in the role of spokesperson for his wife’s foundation.” The Radicals collected a total of 36.140 signatures and submitted them to the parliament’s registry office.

 

Dveri: Vucic announced recognition of “Kosovo” (New Serbian Political Thought)

Judging by the quoted statement in certain media outlets, the Serbian Prime Minister committed a dangerous precedent and obvious step in the intention towards recognition of independence of the Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija. With the statement that he cannot accept “an independent Kosovo at this moment”, he unambiguously said that his government agrees to recognition of the so-called Kosovo and that it remains for them to agree for the right moment! They choose the date! Dveri calls on Serbian President Tomislav Nikolic to be the president of all Serbian citizens, to take measures envisaged by the Constitution and usual political moves that have already been seen in Serbia’s democratic practice and to protect the state and people from direct anti-constitutional practice that is coming from the Prime Minister. That is Nikolic’s responsibility, because he took an oath as the head of state – as the supreme commander of the Serbian Army – to defend Serbia’s constitutional order. Now it is absolutely clear that Tomislav Nikolic was absolutely right in the claim that “Kosovo” is the condition for the EU, which Aleksandar Vucic de facto confirmed with this statement. We are warning Nikolic that he must not accept again the government’s anti-constitutional practice – as he did when he gave up his platform in the parliament. He had recently publicly revealed that the EU is blackmailing Serbia regarding Kosovo and Metohija so now is the moment to demand from Vucic a public response – whether he had already accepted this blackmailing.

 

REGIONAL PRESS

 

Decision made on the destruction of arms and ammunition (Srna)

The B&H Presidency issued a decision on the destruction of weapons, ammunition and explosive ordnance of the B&H Armed Forces. Ministry of Defense is in charge of destroying all quantities of defective ammunition which is identified as such after the check-technical inspections on sites in Bukova Greda, Orasje, Jahorina potok at Pale, Bacevici in Mostar and Duzi in Trebinje.

The decision was made at the session (The Decision on donation) - Handover of the armament of the B&H Armed Forces Directorate for Coordination of Police Bodies of B&H and the Correctional center of Banja Luka, reads the press release of the B&H Presidency.

The Presidency of B&H has adopted the Decision on Amendments to the Decision on the participation of infantry units of the Armed Forces in the operation “Decisive support” in Afghanistan and the decision on the appointment of Major Josip Brajkovic for the position of the Chief of part of the contingent of the B&H Armed Forces in this operation. The offer of the United Nations and UNDP to finance analysis - studies on the possibilities of B&H in increasing the participation in Peacekeeping operations was also accepted. The B&H Presidency approved the conclusion of the Memorandum of Understanding between the Ministry of Security and the Federal Ministry of Internal Affairs of Austria on the improvement of cooperation in the field of prevention of disasters caused by natural causes or human activity and the elimination of their consequences. The decision to initiate the procedure for conducting the negotiations for the conclusion of the Agreement between the Council of Ministers and the Government of Armenia on the abolition of visas for holders of diplomatic passports was also made. At the same session the decision was made to initiate the procedure for conducting the negotiations for the conclusion of the Agreement between the Council of Ministers and the International Center for Promotion of entrepreneurship on establishing its regional office in B&H. The B&H Presidency accepted the agreement between the Council of Ministers and the Government of Germany on the issue of graves of the victims of war, and of delegate the responsibility for the provision of air traffic between the Council of Ministers and the Governments of Serbia, Montenegro and Croatia.

The Presidency adopted at the session also the decision to initiate the procedure for conducting the negotiations for the conclusion of the Agreement between the Council of Ministers and the Croatian Government on the use and maintenance of road border bridges at the common border.

 

Mehmedovic: Dodik will not determine what SDA will do! (Oslobodjenje/Patria)

Semsudin Mehmedovic, SDA delegate in the B&H Parliamentary Assembly, sees the message by SNSD leader Milorad Dodik that his party's delegates would leave the House sessions until Chairman Sefik Dzaferovic is dismissed as a move expected from those who are still in power, Patria reports. “This is about well-thought-out obstructions and blockades, by which the present convocation of the government is trying to hold on as long as possible, and the new coalition shows itself incapable of taking responsibility and obligations. Dodik’s moves are not a surprise. What he says, that the SDA can propose someone else in place of Dzaferovic, to that I tell him that he will not say what the SDA will do. And whether someone replaces Dzaferovic, the SDA as its party organs, it has its caucus that will decide what we will do," said Mehmedovic.

Dodik at the press conference in Banja Luka accused Dzaferovic of knowing of crimes against Serbs in Vozuca, and that because of this he must leave his position as chairman. SNSD delegates, as he said, at every session will seek to include this as an item on the agenda, until then, they will leave the session until Dzaferovic leaves.

 

IMF: No new tranche of the loan for B&H (Srna)

The Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in late January will not consider a new tranche for Bosnia and Herzegovina (B&H), as it was previously announced, said IMF Resident Representative in B&H Ruben Atoyan. Atoyan said that the IMF mission to B&H is not in a position to recommend to the Executive Board of this financial institution the consideration of the eighth review of the Stand-By Arrangement, due to “lack of progress in regard to the remaining issues”. “We are currently in the process of planning the mission that would hold the talks within the framework of consultations under the Article 4. It is a matter of mandatory consultations for all members of the IMF,” said Atoyan. He stated that these consultations will provide an opportunity to make a broader IMF assessment of economic developments and policies in the B&H. The IMF mission, led by Ron van Roden, visited the B&H in December last year in order to continue talks within the framework of the eighth review of the Stand-by Arrangement. The Executive Directors of the IMF on September 26^th 2012 approved the request of B&H in regard to the two-year Stand-By Arrangement. Combined sixth and seventh reviews were concluded on 30^th of June, when the increase of Stand-By Arrangement for the amount of 95.7 million euros was approved to B&H in order to fulfill the urgent needs of the balance of payments caused by a catastrophic May flooding in B&H. The closing of the reviews and increase of the program has enabled remittance in the amount of 191.4 million euros.

 

Thaqi to Poposki: Pristina­-Belgrade dialogue is good model for Skopje-Athens (Republika)

EU integration of all regional countries is exceptionally significant, while their mutual cooperation and promotion of joint projects is important in meeting EU membership aspirations, agreed Macedonian and Kosovo Foreign Ministers, Nikola Poposki and Hashim Thaqi respectively, after Thursday’s meeting in Skopje. “Kosovo and Macedonia share excellent bilateral relations and open political dialogue. We are working on joint infrastructure projects and cross­-border cooperation that are significant for our mutual European ambitions. We referred to the possibility for further enhancement of cooperation in the fields of justice, education, property rights, traffic and projects for investment stimulation”, said  Poposki. Agreements on mutual investment protection and cooperation between the ministries’ diplomatic academies are to be signed later in the day. Poposki announced the two governments would hold a joint meeting in the first half of 2015, whereas citizens would cross the countries’ borders with IDs within months. Thaqi said Kosovo made efforts for stable and peaceful region with clear European perspective. “Kosovo’s goal is EU and NATO accession and we support Macedonia in its Euro­-Atlantic efforts, as well as settlement of the name row with Greece. The Pristina­-Belgrade dialogue could serve as a model in this regard. It is necessary to put disputes in the past and look towards a common future”, said Thaqi. He stressed that Kosovo supported the Ohrid Framework Agreement implementation, in the interest of peace and stability. “We are continually working on enhancement of bilateral cooperation, also seen through today’s signing of the two agreements”, said Thaqi. He added that Kosovo has already launched the construction of motorway section from Pristina to the Macedonian border, worth 600 million euros, hoping Macedonia would do the same from Skopje to the Kosovo border.

 

INTERNATIONAL PRESS

 

Kosovo miners end strike, give government more time to decide mines's fate (Reuters, 22 January 2015)

PRISTINA - Hundreds of miners in Kosovo ended a three-day strike on Thursday in the country's richest mine, which is also claimed by Serbia.

Kosovo's new government said last week it would take control of the Trepca mining complex but backtracked on Monday following a furious response from Serbia.

On Tuesday, some 350 Trepca miners refused to return from their shift below ground to protest the government reversal. The number later reached around 800 miners.

Trepcas spokesman Musa Mustafa said the strike was called off after the government agreed to reconsider its position. Work will restart on Friday morning.

Serbia does not recognize Kosovo's 2008 declaration of independence and claims some 75 percent of Trepca. It had warned that any attempt by Pristina to take over the mine would jeopardize EU-mediated talks between the two sides.

The Trepca complex of lead, zinc and silver mines once employed 20,000 people and accounted for the majority of the former Yugoslavia's mineral wealth.

Since Kosovo's 1999 breakaway from Serbia, Trepca has been held in trust and readied for sale by a United Nations agency.

 

Murder Testimony Against Kosovo Serb Leader ‘Unconvincing’ (BIRN, by Una Hajdari, 22 January 2015)

The defence of Kosovo Serb leader Oliver Ivanovic, accused of ordering paramilitary police to kill several ethnic Albanians in April 1999, said an alleged eyewitness had failed to prove his guilt.

Ivanovic’s lawyer Nebojsa Vlajic told journalists in Mitrovica on Thursday that “nothing was proven” by the testimony of a key witness who said that the Serb politician Ivanovic led a group of paramilitary policemen who seized him and other ethnic Albanians on April 14, 1999, when the killings took place.

“Not a single word he said claimed with certainty that Oliver Ivanovic was the commander of the action in which the Albanians were killed, not a single word he said confirmed that Ivanovic gave orders,” said Vlajic.

“It is not certain that Ivanovic had a leadership position in that action, if he was ever present at all,” he added.

The witness, Isa Mustafa, testified on Wednesday that he was one of nine Albanian men who were ordered by men in military uniforms led by Ivanovic to leave their homes. Four of the men were later killed.

A former Serbian government official and head of a Kosovo Serb political party called Freedom, Democracy, Justice, Ivanovic is accused of war crimes by ordering the murder of ethnic Albanians in Mitrovica on April 14, 1999 during the NATO bombing, when he was allegedly the leader of a paramilitary police unit.

He is also accused, along with another person, of inciting the killing of ethnic Albanians during unrest that erupted after the war on February 3, 2000, when many Albanians were driven from their homes.

Four other defendants, Dragoljub Delibasic, father and son Ilija and Nebojsa Vujacic, and Aleksandar Lazovic, also face charges of murder or attempted murder.

All of them have pleaded not guilty.

 

Serbian minister: For EU integration, we need the understanding of our citizens (EurActiv, 22 January 2015)

EU integration means deep reform. This is why Serbia needs the understanding of its citizens, as well as of its partners in the Union, Jadranka Joksimović told EurActiv Serbia in an exclusive interview.

She spoke to EurActiv Serbia’s Smiljana Vukojčić and Maja Poznatov.

Jadranka Joksimović is Serbia’s minister without portfolio responsible for European integration. She is a member of the center-right Serbian Progressive Party.

Do you think Belgrade's historically good relations with Russia could threaten Serbia’s EU accession?

We know very well what our obligations along the European integration path are, and we shall fulfill them gradually, in order to be fully prepared at the moment of EU accession.

Our position is clear and we have reiterated it: We respect Ukrainian territorial integrity, but we shall not impose sanctions on the Russian Federation. The question is whether this could hamper our European integration process. It certainly could.

However, it would be somewhat inconsistent to expect us to impose the sanctions, regardless of the economic and political circumstances which would be to our detriment, considering that Serbia has not yet opened any negotiating chapters and it does not participate in the decision-making process regarding European foreign policy issues. On the other hand, it is noteworthy that not all member states have fully harmonised their foreign policies on all issues.

21 January is the first anniversary of the official launch of the EU accession negotiations. What would you outline as your main challenge?

The implementation of the initiated reforms is the main challenge, and I personally approach it with enormous enthusiasm and optimism. I have repeatedly emphasized that the negotiations are not aimed at achieving a record-breaking speed in the opening of chapters, but for the opening of individual chapters to support the dynamics of the reform process, to stimulate their consistent and timely implementation. In order to achieve this, we need our citizens to understand the reason for negotiating.

Prime Minister Aleksander Vučić recently mentioned that Serbia could open four chapters in the first half of the year. Do you think it is realistic expectation?

I expect that this year we will be able to open the most important political chapters – 23 and 24, whose benchmarks are reflected in drafting of and performance according to the action plans. Naturally, we also hope for the opening of chapter 32 – financial control, which we were prepared to open in December. However, that did not happen because the opening of political chapters was insisted on, initially. This is why the resumption of dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina at the beginning of February is highly important, after which we will have more information about the possible opening of chapter 35 as well.

When will the final versions of the action plans for the chapters 23 and 24 [Judiciary and Fundamental Rights and Justice, Freedom and Security] be sent to the European Commission?

The draft action plan for chapter 23 has been forwarded to the Commission. We are about to send the draft action plan for chapter 24.

Will the continuation of the dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina, scheduled for 9 February, be considered a sufficient step forward for opening of the first chapter?

We are determined to continue the dialogue with Pristina regarding the normalization of relations, as a best way to achieve concrete results. We are well aware of our obligations stemming from the Brussels agreement, but we expect the other side to start fulfilling its obligations as well.

It is true that there are several uncertainties regarding chapter 35 [any other business, where the future relation between Belgrade and Pristina is expected to be formulated] i.e. implementation of the Brussels agreement, which some countries insist should be opened first. I hope that the continuation of the high level dialogue will be the opportunity for eliminating some of these uncertainties.

In Brussels, there are is a belief that Serbia could do more to implement agreements with Pristina. Do you think this is true?

Serbia has signed the Brussels agreement, which reflects the reality that Serbia did not recognize Kosovo's independence. Belgrade has done very much unilaterally, not waiting for the government in Pristina to be formed. The position that we maintain and that we are entitled to implies that Serbia should not be delayed in the European integration process due to the fact that Pristina did not form its government for months, and that it did not take part in the dialogue.

Do you think there is a risk that some bilateral issues with EU members, such as the border dispute with Croatia, can slow down or block the integration at some point, as already happened during the accession of Croatia?

The European integration process and the EU represent a good framework for the deepening of relations between the states on numerous issues, including the development of regional infrastructure – which is also a part of the European transport network, economy, education, youth exchange programmes, culture etc. Serbia also has issues with other states, but it is our goal to resolve them in a cooperative spirit.

A recent poll by the Ipsos Strategic Marketing showed that Serbians have a more positive attitude towards Russia than towards the EU, but that they would prefer their children live in the EU than in Russia. How do you comment on that?

The results of the poll should be sought in the history of Serbia-Russia relations, and in the fact that it was believed until recently that it was sufficient to declare support for the EU. The EU was used as an ideological crutch for winning the elections.

This is exactly why this government is committed to reforms aimed at creating a modern, functioning and organised state, which will also prove our EU orientation. Clearly, after a long period of confusion, Serbian citizens finally came to understand and decide that our future belongs with the club of European states.

 

Islamist Terror Threat Draws EU, Balkans Together (Balkan Insight, by Gjeraqina Tuhina, 23 January 2015)

New internal security strategy for Europe will involve ever-closer links to security structures in the Western Balkans

The European Union and countries of Western Balkans are reinforcing cooperation in the fight against Islamist terrorism, especially in the light of new terrorist threats coming to light in some countries in Western Europe. Countries in the region have also been identified as potential targets.

A senior EU official who deals with anti-terrorism issues confirmed that Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo are countries that rank high on the “risk list” on terms of the number of their citizen leaving to fight in the Middle East.

“We already have 500 people from the Western Balkans who have joined the terrorists in Syria and Iraq. Most are from Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo,” the EU official said.

However, this official said European institutions are generally satisfied with the level of cooperation with security structures in the countries concerned. EU experts say serious work is being done to tighten border controls, intercept suspects, exchange information and identify criminal networks.

“The other field that we are seriously working on is breaking the propaganda of extreme radical imams in the Balkans,” the EU source confirmed. EU experts are trying to engage the “moderate religious leaders who make up majority of the Muslim population,” he said.

According to EU statistics, 3,000 to 5,000 European citizens have left their countries to join the fighting in Syria or Iraq.

EU officials say that Europeans joining the Islamist wars use the Bulgarian border with Turkey as a transit route to cross to Syria or Iraq. Therefore, according to EU officials, Sofia needs more European help to effectively oversee the frontiers.

Croatia also has a big burden of responsibility because this new EU member state borders Bosnia and Herzegovina, which has been identified as a potential threat. The borders of Croatia are also the external borders of the European Union.

Frans Timmeramns, Vice-President of the European Commission, has announced the intention of the Commission to push ahead with a new security strategy. One of the highlights, Timmermans says, will be data protection as well as the possibility of reinforcing the EU’s passport-free Schengen area with special attention to Schengen zone’s outside borders.

The Commission aims to present its “internal security strategy” in May”, Timmermans told journalists recently.

The EU’s anti-terrorism coordinator, Gilles de Kerchove, has also sent member states a new counter-terrorism strategy, prepared following this month’s terrorist attack in Paris. Although sealed, the leaked measures controversially include asking internet companies to hand over encryption keys.

“The Commission should be invited to explore rules obliging Internet and telecommunications companies operating in the EU to provide access of the relevant national authorities to communications (i.e. share encryption keys),” the paper is reported to say. The paper will be discussed at the EU justice and home affairs ministers meeting in Riga, Latvia, on January 29.

 

 

 

Hague Tribunal Faces a Dramatic 2015 (BIRN, by Denis Dzidic, 19 January 2015)

Verdicts in the high-profile war crimes trial of Radovan Karadzic and Goran Hadzic are due this year, while the controversy over the release of Vojislav Seselj looks set to continue.

The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, ICTY, will hand down two first-instance verdicts in 2015, in the cases against Bosnian Serb leader Karadzic and Croatian Serb leader Hadzic, plus four appeals verdicts, as the UN-backed court faces one of its busiest years since it was established.

Former Bosnian Serb Army officials Zdravko Tolimir and Vujadin Popovic, Ljubisa Beara, Drago Nikolic, Radivoje Miletic and Vinko Pandurevic are appealing against jail sentences for crimes in Srebrenica, former Bosnian Serb officials Mico Stanisic and Stojan Zupljanin against sentences for murders in the Krajina region, while a appeal also will rule on the acquittal of former Serbian security officials Jovica Stanisic and Franko Simatovic for crimes in Croatia and Bosnia.

Chief ICTY prosecutor Serge Brammertz told BIRN that many people in the former Yugoslavia, and particularly victims and the families of those who died during the 1990s conflicts, are watching keenly to see that justice is done.

“All war crimes prosecutors, whether in The Hague or in the region, face the same challenge in 2015: to continue to strive to meet the public’s strong desire for justice and accountability. Many victims, from every community, are still waiting for justice and still waiting to learn what happened to their loved ones,” Brammertz said.

Balkans expert Eric Gordy told BIRN that he does not expect any major surprises in the upcoming verdicts, and the most interesting things will be whether Karadzic is found guilty of genocide in seven Bosnian municipalities in 1992 as well as in Srebrenica in 1995, and whether Stanisic and Simatovic will be convicted after being initially acquitted of aiding and abetting wartime crimes in Croatia and Bosnia.

But whatever happens, there will be public controversy, Gordy believes.

“Part of the reason for this is not the fault of the Tribunal, but derives instead from the tendency of media and politicians in the region to take an ethnic cheerleading approach to evidence and verdicts,” he said.

Verdicts all year round

The first verdict of the year will be handed down on January 30, when the appeals chamber will decide whether former high-ranking Bosnian Serb Army officials Popovic, Beara, Nikolic, Miletic and Pandurevic are guilty of crimes related to the massacre of over 7,000 Bosniak men and boys from Srebrenica in July 1995.

In June 2010, Popovic and Beara were sentenced to life in prison for genocide, Nikolic to 35 years for assisting genocide and Miletic and Pandurevic to 19 and 13 years respectively for aiding the murders and the expulsion of civilians.

In March, another high-profile Srebrenica-related appeals verdict is scheduled, this time for Zdravko Tolimir, former deputy commander of the Bosnian Serb Army’s Main Headquarters. Tolimir was sentenced in 2012 to life in prison for genocide.

The appeals chamber will hand down a final verdict in June in the case against former Serbian officials Stanisic and Simatovic. Both were acquitted in 2013 of aiding and abetting the persecution of non-Serbs from Bosnia and Croatia from 1991 to 1995.

Gordy believes that the Stanisic and Simatovic verdict will be interesting from the point of view of establishing the rule of law in international conflicts. He explained that the appeals chamber will have the opportunity to reassess whether the two Belgrade officials should be found guilty despite the fact that their aid to local Serb forces fighting in both countries was not “specifically directed” towards committing crimes.

“In the Stanisic and Simatovic case, the trial chamber applied the controversial new standard of ‘specific direction’, which has since been strongly contested at other tribunals and also before the ICTY itself. That make this case very sensitive for the future of international law, and major international powers will pay close attention to the appeal,” he said.

The Karadzic question

The most highly-anticipated verdict of the year, in the case against Karadzic for genocide in Srebrenica in 1995 and other municipalities in 1992, the persecution of Bosniaks and Croats throughout the country, terrorising the population of Sarajevo and taking UN peacekeepers hostage, is scheduled for October.

The biggest question, said Gordy, is whether the former leader of the Bosnian Serb entity Republika Srpska will be found guilty of genocide in 1992 in the municipalities of Bratunac, Foca, Kljuc, Prijedor, Sanski Most, Vlasenica and Zvornik. This charge was dismissed by judges in 2012 but reinstated the year afterwards, with the court saying that evidence produced by the prosecution “could indicate that Karadzic possessed genocidal intent”.

“A finding that genocide existed as a policy and as one of the war aims of RS [Republika Srpska] in the Karadzic case, where the most systematic evidence has been presented on the point, would profoundly alter the Tribunal’s record in producing an account of that conflict,” Gordy suggested.

“However, this kind of finding would be surprising, not because of the evidence that has been presented but because of the generally cautious and conservative approach of trial chambers, especially in the ICTY’s last period,” he said.

A month after Karadzic’s verdict, the appeals chamber is set to hand down the final verdict in the case of former Bosnian Serb officials Mico Stanisic and Stojan Zupljanin, who are charged with the murders and expulsions of Bosniaks and Croats from the Krajina region in northern Bosnia. Both men were initially sentenced to 22 years in prison.

Finally, in December, the first-instance verdict in the case against Croatian Serb leader Goran Hadzic will be delivered.

Playing politics with justice

Gordy believes that such a large number of verdicts is bound to present challenges for the outreach office of the Hague Tribunal as it seeks to present the outcomes as just to the general public in former Yugoslav countries, where ethnic divisions remain and biased media often react strongly against court decisions they see as offensive to ‘their’ communities.

“Little has been done to acquaint the publics in the region with the documentary record and the issues at stake. I am afraid that there is very little that can be hoped for here. There is not time to compensate for the undone work of 20 years, and successful outreach always depended on institutions in the region being involved in the effort, which they have not been,” he said.

The director of Al Jazeera Balkans, veteran journalist and editor Goran Milic, told BIRN that all the verdicts are bound to be “a regional media event”.

“However, a big problem is the comments on those judicial decisions, because whenever something happens, you have comments and harangues, and that makes the situation worse,” Milic said.

The ICTY is also set to decide this year how to proceed with the war crimes case against Serbian Radical Party leader Vojislav Seselj. His verdict was scheduled for October last year but was postponed after one of the judges in the trial was removed for alleged bias, and the new judge is expected to take until at least the end of June to familiarise himself with details of the case, causing yet another delay in the marathon trial.

Seselj meanwhile has the potential to create other problems for the ICTY. After being temporarily released for cancer treatment in November last year and arriving in Belgrade to a rapturous welcome from his admirers, the nationalist politician has declared that he will not return to The Hague voluntarily for his verdict, and has challenged the Serbian government to send him back by force.

The way in which the Seselj situation is ultimately resolved, as well as the crucial verdicts, will ensure that the Tribunal remains in the headlines throughout the year.

 

 

* * *

 

Media summaries are produced for the internal use of the United Nations Office in Belgrade, UNMIK and UNHQ. The contents do not represent anything other than a selection of articles likely to be of interest to a United Nations readership.