Informazione

: Objavljeno 04 februar 2002

DECISION OF THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL COURT

Here is the second part of the text.
The first has been already distributed - see
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/1554
The third - and last - follows in a subsequent posting.

===*===

After it was made on November 6, the Decision of the Federal
Constitutional Court on unconstitutionality of the the Federal
Government's Decree on cooperation with the so-called tribunal in the
Hague has finally been published. Here is an unofficial English
translation of it.

OFFICIAL GAZETTE OF FRY, No.70/01, December 28, 2001

(...) [for the first part see:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/1554%5d

III

1. The Federal Government regulated in
the contested Decree the procedure
for cooperation of the Federal Republic
of Yugoslavia with the International
Criminal Tribunal in criminal prosecution
of individuals responsible for
grave crimes against the international
humanitarian law perpetrated in the
territory of ex-Yugoslavia since
1991(hereinafter: the International
Criminal Tribunal) and performance of
obligations of FRY stemming from the
Security Council Resolution 827(1993) and
the Statute of the International
Criminal Tribunal.

The Decree covered, inter alia: transfer
of criminal proceedings held in the
national courts to the International
Criminal Tribunal if so requested;
proceedings and jurisdiction of courts
and other authorities for decision
making in such matters (Article 12 ad
13): the proceedings in national
courts after the transfer of the
proceedings to the International Criminal
Tribunal (Article 14): the possibility of
extradition of all the accused
(foreigners and Yugoslav citizens) to the
jurisdiction of the International
Criminal Tribunal and its investigation
bodies to undertake activities in
the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia(Articles 9 and 10); legal
assistance to
the International Criminal Tribunal,
including granting of transit of the
Yugoslav citizens through the territory
if the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia( Articles 18 and 19) and
others. The Decree contains references
to the application of the Statute of the
International Criminal Tribunal and
its Rules of Procedure and Evidence, to
be applied by judicial and other
authorities in the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia (Articles l, 2, 6, 12 and 17).

2. The provisions of Constitution of FRY
provided for the following: power
in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is
organized along the principle of
division of legislative, executive and
judicial power (Article 12); the
executive and judicial power are bound by
the laws, which are in compliance
with the Constitution (Article 9, pars 2
and 3); the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia honors in good faith, the
obligations under the international
treaties to which is a party, and the
international treaties ratified and
published in keeping with the
Constitution and generally accepted rules
of the international law that are an
integral part of the national legal system
(Article 16); a constituent republic is
sovereign in those matters not
covered by the Constitution of FRY as
competences of the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia and that a constituent
republic may independently regulate its
governance under its own Constitution
(Article 6, pars 2 and 3); that no
Yugoslav citizen may be deprived of its
citizenship, expelled from his
country, or extradited to another
state(Article 17, par 3); that everyone
is entitle to personal freedom and no one
may be apprehended except in the
cases processed under the federal law and
that illegal apprehension is
punishable (Article 23, pars 1,2, and 6);
that everyone is entitled to equal
protection of his/her rights in legally
determined procedure (Article 26,
par 1); that no one may be punished for
any offense before it had been
perpetrated, was not set out in the law
or regulation based on the law as a
punishable offence, nor may be sentenced
to the term which was not legally
stipulated for such an offense (Article
27, par 1); that no one may be
repeatedly sentenced or punished for an
offense in the case finally
suspended or the indictment finally
dismissed or if he/she finally
acquitted or sentenced (Article 28); that
a foreigner may be extradited to
another state only in the cases
stipulated in the international treaties
which are binding on the Federal Republic
of Yugoslavia, and that the right
to asylum is guaranteed to a foreign
national and a person without
citizenship persecuted due to democratic
views and on the grounds of his/her
participation in the movements for social
and national liberations, for
freedom and rights of a human being, or
for freedom of scientific or
artistic creative work (Article 66, pars
2 and 3); that only law may
stipulate the ways of realization of
individual freedoms and rights of man
and citizens when so stipulated under the
Constitution of FRY or necessary
for their realization and that freedoms
and rights recognized and guaranteed
by the Constitution of FRY enjoy judicial
protection (Article 67, pars. 2
and 4); as well as that the Federal
Government may enact the decrees,
decisions and other instruments for
implementation of the federal laws and
other regulations and general enactments
of the Federal Parliament (Article
99, par 1, item 4) .

The provisions of Chapters XXX and XXXI
of the Law on Criminal Proceedings
(Official Gazette of FRY Nos.4/77,
14/85,54/87,57/89,3/90 and Official
Gazette of FRY Nos. 27/92 and 24/94)
stipulated the procedure for
international legal assistance and
performance under the international
treaties in criminal matters as well as
the procedure for the extradition of
the accused and sentenced individuals.
Those provisions, inter alia,
stipulated territorial and actual
jurisdiction of national courts and other
state authorities in the procedure on the
request of the foreign authority
and even in case when the request
concerns criminal offence which under the
national regulations no extradition is
allows; that one of the conditions
for extradition of the accused or
sentenced individuals is that such an
individual is no Yugoslav citizen as well
as that the requested extradition
of any individual shall have been ruled
by the competent court.

3. The Federal Constitutional Court,
starting from the above stated
provisions of the Constitution of FRY and
the Law on Criminal Proceedings
finds that the contested Decree does not
comply with the Constitution and
the Law on Criminal Proceedings.

To begin with, the contested Decree is
not in compliance with the
Constitution of FRY because it regulated
the procedure (means) of
realization of individual freedoms and
rights of a man and citizen
determined under the Constitution of FRY
by the competent authority. Namely,
further to the provisions of Article 67,
par 2, of the Constitution of FRY
the manner (procedure) of implementation
of individual freedoms and human
and civil rights may be stipulated by the
law only, provided however, that
this possibility is anticipated in the
Constitution of FRY or when it is
necessary for their implementation. The
provisions of Article 26, par 1 of
the Constitution of FRY it was further
laid down that everyone is entitled
to equal protection of its rights in the
legally prescribed procedure. By
the contested Decree the Federal
Government as the executive authority,
having regulated the possibility and the
procedure for transfer of criminal
proceedings underway in the national
court to the International Criminal
Tribunal at its request, having regulated
the application of the provisions
of the Chapter XXXI of the Law on
Criminal Proceedings which covers also
apprehension of the individual requested
to be extradited to the
International Criminal Tribunal, having
regulated the power of the
International Criminal Tribunal to
undertake investigation activities
against the individuals in the territory
of FRY, actually regulated the
manner (procedure) of realization,
limitation and protection of individual
freedoms and human and civil by a by-law.
The law only, as was already
mentioned, may regulate such a procedure,
enacted by legislative power,
which was done in the matters of criminal
legal protection under the law on
Criminal Proceedings.

The contested Decree of the Federal
Government regulated apart from the
procedure also the jurisdiction and
composition of courts and jurisdiction
of governments in constituent republics
to decide on the requests of the
International Criminal Tribunal despite
the fact that further to Article 6
of the Constitution of FRY a constituent
republic may autonomously regulate
governance and competences of its own
authorities.

Having stipulated the application of the
Statute of the International
Criminal Tribunal and its Rules of
Procedure and Evidence by the Courts and
other authorities in FRY the Federal
Government overstepped its
constitutional powers of the executive
branch because confirmation of the
International legal acts and their
integration into the internal legal
system falls within the exclusive purview
of the Federal Parliament, under
Article 78 of the Constitution of FRY, as
legislative and representative
body of the citizens of Yugoslavia and
her constituent republics.

Apart from the stated non-constitutionality
the disputed Decree is further
in conflict with the Constitution of FRY
because it regulates the
possibility of extradition of the
Yugoslav citizens even outside the area
of territorial jurisdiction and Yugoslav
judicial and other state authorities
although the Constitution of FRY in its
Article 17, par.3 explicitly bans
such a possibility in the case of
Yugoslav citizens. A foreign citizen may
be extradited only in the cases and under
the procedure stipulated in the
Constitution of FRY, the Law on Criminal
Proceeding and international
treaties. The Federal Constitutional
Court finds that the Constitution of
FRY, namely the mentioned Article 17 par
3, no extradition of the Yugoslav
citizens outside the sovereign territory
of the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia irrespective whether the
request for extradition was submitted by
the court established by one state or
several states under an international
treaty or under the instrument of an
international organization, because the
provisions of the Constitution of FRY as
the basic law in FR Yugoslavia in
the hierarchy of legal regulations are
the norms of the highest legal
priority and therefore any other general
norms, including published
international treaties must comply with
its provisions.

The legal instruments of the federal and
republic governments, federal and
republic laws containing legal solutions
in conflict with the constitutional
provisions cannot stand in harmony with
the Constitution of FRY. Neither the
federal laws confirming the International
treaties can be in compliance if
such treaties contain provisions contrary
to the Constitution of FRY. Only
an act of legal strength equal to
constitution may change the
constitutional
provisions, specifically those relating
to human and civil rights such as
the provision of Article 17, par 3
prohibiting deprivation of citizenship,
expulsion from the country or extradition
of a Yugoslav citizen to others.
Since this provision is located within
the basic provisions of the
Constitution of FRY, the Federal
Constitutional Court submits that it
acknowledges and guarantees human and
civil rights and freedoms and citizens
in FR of Yugoslavia in keeping with the
Universal declaration on human
rights. The same goes for the possibility
provided for by the Decree if the
permission for transit of the Yugoslav
nationals through the territory of
the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia at the
request of the International
Criminal Tribunal. The Federal
Constitutional Court is competent to rule
whether any of the general norms are in
compliance with the Constitution of
FRY or not, and its rulings are generally
binding and final, with the legal
consequences set out in the Constitution
of FRY and the Law on the Federal
Constitutional Court.

The Federal Constitutional Court,
starting from the nature of the legal
instrument, its substance and
promulgator, has not gone deeper into
structuring the final legal views on the
manner of the implementation of the
Decree, legal nature or the manner of
honoring the obligations created by
the establishment of the International
Criminal Tribunal under the Security
Council Resolution. Consequently, the
Federal Constitutional Court in this
Decision provided no complete replies to
the question: did the Security
Council, as one of the main bodies of the
United Nations, laid down in the
Charter, and primarily responsible for
maintenance of international peace
and security, and which in performing
that mandate must act in conformity
with the goals and principles of United
Nations (Article 24 of the Charter),
in establishing the International
Criminal Tribunal acted in keeping with
the United Nations Charter or overstepped
its powers, namely acted ultra
virus; whether the establishment of the
International Criminal Tribunal, as
an ad hoc measure which should though
criminal prosecution of the
individuals responsible for grave
violations of the international
humanitarian law, enable reestablishment
of peace in the territory of former
SFRY and its maintenance, in keeping with
the measures that the Security
Council may take as conducive to the
maintenance of the international peace
and security, in conformity with the
Charter and its own Rules of Procedure;
whether and in what way is FR of
Yugoslavia bound, as member of United
Nations, to cooperate with the
International Criminal Tribunal, which is not
a court authority envisaged by the United
Nations Charter, unlike the
International Court of Justice,
anticipated in Chapter XIV of the Charter,
but "a measure" of the Security Council;
whether the acts and measures of
the Security Council taken with reference
to the Charter of the United
Nations have the same force as the
Charter itself (whether they are its
integral part?); how to proceed under the
Statute and other by-laws of that
Tribunal, without harmonization of the
internal law with their substance;
whether the Statute and the Rules of the
Tribunal are based on generally
accepted principles and rules of
international law and particularly on the
rules on the function of the prosecutor
in the proceedings, ban of renewed
trial in the same case, detention,
duration of which is not limited, the so
called covert indictments, anonymous
witnesses, duration of the imprisonment
term, extradition of nationals etc.;
whether priority of legal instruments
exists in the hierarchy of international
law and whether the acts of the
United Nations bodies must be in
conformity with the Charter of the United
Nations, and which body and in which
procedure determines that concord; that
the members of the United Nations are
obliged to enforce the instruments of
UN only if they were adopted in
conformity with the Charter of the United
Nations, which member states accepted or
the obligation of the members
exists by the very act of acceptance of
the Charter, as a multinational
international treaty; whether some states
members of the United Nations,
which through their competent body,
adopted respective instruments on
cooperation with the International
Criminal Tribunal violated the Charter of
UN because they banned under these
instruments the extradition of their
nationals to that Court, because such
cooperation is prohibited by their
constitutions and why they had to adopt
such instruments if the Resolution
of the Security Council on the
establishment of the International Criminal
Tribunal 827 and the Statute of that
Court are integral parts of the
internal law of those states; why certain
member states of UN had to change
their constitutions which prohibited the
extradition of their nationals to
other states, to be able to pass the
instrument governing the cooperation
with the International Criminal Tribunal
which includes also the
extradition of their nationals to the
mentioned court, if the instruments of
the Security Council of the United
Nations, in the legal hierarchy have
priority over the constitutions of UN
member states, or have the same
strength, on the other hand; whether the
stated practice of these UN member
states clearly shows that the
constitution of UN member states are the
legal instruments with the highest legal
strength in every UN member state,
and that, consequently the instruments of
the competent state authorities
enabling the implementation of the
mentioned Resolution of the Security
Council and the Statute of the
International Criminal Tribunal, must be
approved in compliance with the
constitution of a member state, in formal
and material terms, and that the
instruments of the Security Council
therefore represent no legal merit for
direct implementation by the very
fact of their instruments, since every
UN member state has to make own
decision about their integration into the
legal system of every UN member
state, to determine, under its
constitution the competent authority and in
the prescribed manner; whether the act of
implementation/integration into
the national legal system passed by the
competent authority of UN member
state can set out the manner of
implementation of individual human rights
and freedom under the rules unpublished
and therefore inaccessible to a
citizen and man applicable to, despite
the fact that the constitution of
that state stipulated the publication of
all general norms as obligatory if
they constitute part of its legal order,
as is the case of the Constitution
of FR Yugoslavia; whether the
promulgation of an instrument for enforcement
of the mentioned Resolution and Statute
of the International Criminal
Tribunal would be in harmony with the
international treaties acceded to by
the UN member states and with the
generally accepted rule of international
law, and many other questions. This is
because the Federal Constitutional
Court submits that replies to all these
questions are irrelevant to the
Court ruling on constitutionality and
legality of the contested Decree.
Namely, the Federal Constitutional Court
in its proceedings determines, as a
preceding question, formal
constitutionality and legality of the contested
general legal instrument, e.g. whether it
was enacted by the competent
authority stipulated in the Constitution
of FRY, confirmed and published
international treaty and federal law.

(2/3 - continues)

: Objavljeno 04 februar 2002

: Objavljeno 04 februar 2002

"DEMOCRATICI" MEDIA JUGOSLAVI INVENTANO
DI SANA PIANTA INTERVISTA A MILOSEVIC

Alcuni media jugoslavi, citandosi a vicenda, e sulla base
di una fonte assolutamente ignota, hanno pubblicato estratti
di una "intervista" che il presidente Milosevic avrebbe
rilasciato al "corrispondente da Roma della agenzia russa
ITAR-TASS" e ad alcuni "altri giornalisti italiani".
Questa vile montatura, pregna di astio e spirito acido,
mira chiaramente a creare confusione in Jugoslavia,
dove la gente e' sempre piu' determinata ad appoggiare
il presidente Milosevic. Inoltre, l'intento e' di nascondere
il vero messaggio politico del presidente Milosevic, dando
molto risalto a simili montature.
(From: "Vladimir Krsljanin" - SPS)

UPOZORENJE: Tzv. intervju Milosevica ITAR-TASS-u je lazan!

Beogradski mediji, pozivajuci se jedan na drugog u krug,
non-stop citiraju ovu jeftinu izmisljotinu, lansiranu sa
ciljem da se stvori konfuzija u casu kada podrska
predsedniku Milosevicu raste, kao i da bi se
sakrile njegove prave poruke.
(From: "Vladimir Krsljanin" - SPS)

SO-CALLED MILOSEVIC'S INTERVIEW TO ITAR-TASS IS FALSE!

Some Yugoslav media, quoting each other, with completelly
unknown source, published excerpts from an "interview" of
President Milosevic given to the "Rome correspondent of
Russian agency ITAR-TASS" and to some "other Italian
journalists". This cheap fabrication, full of spirit of
bitterness and dissapointment has an obvious aim to create
confusion in Yugoslavia, where determination of the people in
support of President Milosevic increases. Also, intention is
to hide the true political messages of President Milosevic by
giving big publicity to fabricated sensations.
(From: "Vladimir Krsljanin" - SPS)

: Objavljeno 04 februar 2002

http://news.ft.com/ft/gx.cgi/ftc?pagename=View&c=Article&cid=
FT3UFAV05XC&live=true&tagid=IXLVJTFUICC&subheading=emergingmarkets

Enron's curious Croatian client
By Robert Wright in Budapest

Financial Times
January 31 2002 23:36

"In one meeting, Mr Tudjman asked Joseph Sutton, head
of Enron's international operations, how much
influence his company had with the US state department
and whether it could arrange WTO entry.
"Mr Sutton said he could not promise WTO membership,
but guaranteed that Enron and the US would lobby for
Croatia's entry into the WTO, Partnership for Peace
and Nato."

The Enron collapse may have finally ended a
long-running scandal over relations between the US
energy company and the semi-authoritarian government
of the late Croatian president, Franjo Tudjman.

Mr Tudjman, who led Croatia through independence,
negotiated a controversial memorandum of understanding
with Enron before his death in December 1999. It would
have given Enron rights to build a power station in
Croatia and run it for 20 years, selling electricity
to HEP, the state electricity company, at above-market
rates.

Questions about the deal intensified after Mr
Tudjman's death and the election, in January 2000, of
a democratic government. Tapes of conversations show
that Mr Tudjman hoped giving Enron the contract would
secure political favours, including a state visit to
Washington.

After renegotiation, Enron is thought to have retained
the right to build a power station and sell
electricity to HEP at above-market rates, though lower
than previously. That contract expires this summer,
though details are unclear due to confidentiality
agreements.

Enron's power deliveries to Croatia ended on November
30, when other European deliveries ceased. The power
station has not been built.

The deal's legacy, however, may be the light it sheds
on Mr Tudjman in his later years - and on Enron's
readiness to and play along with his fantasies.

In the weekly magazine Globus, President Tudjman said
that, on top of a visit to Washington, he expected
Croatia to join the World Trade Organisation, Nato's
Partnership for Peace programme and Nato itself if he
signed the deal. He even linked the deal to avoiding
his arrest and that of other senior figures by the
Hague-based International Criminal Tribunal.

Croatia had been isolated politically - particularly
by the European Union - over treatment of Serbs during
the offensive that ended its war of independence.

When challenged on the cost of electricity under the
deal - an estimated $120m-$200m above market prices
over 20 years - he justified it using the political
benefits.

: Objavljeno 04 februar 2002

Subject: Part 1 - PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC IN
THE HAGUE JAN. 30, 2002 - OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 22:57:13 EST
From: JaredI@...
To: JaredI@...

International Committee to Defend Slobodan
Milosevic www.icdsm.org

The URL for this article is:
http://www.icdsm.org/milosevic/30jan.htm

Subscribe to the ICDSM email list at
http://www.icdsm.org/maillist.htm
Receive no more than one article per day.

=============================================
Part 1 - PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC IN THE HAGUE
JAN. 30, 2002 - OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT

BY ADDING THREE LIES, ONE DOES NOT GET THE
TRUTH - ONLY A BIGGER LIE
[Posted 1 February 2002]
=============================================

Pres. Milosevic:

By adding three lies, one does not get the
truth - only a bigger lie.

All three indictments really have a thread
running through them - to use an
expression I've heard used here - which is
the ongoing crime against
Yugoslavia and against my people.

This here is obviously a colossal abuse of
power to fabricate an historical
forgery in which those who advocated the
preservation of Yugoslavia would be
charged with its destruction; those who
defended the country would be accused
of crimes; and those who advocated and
committed secession, advocating
separatism and terrorism, would be given
amnesty - because they were backed
by forces that wanted to establish control
over the Balkans, so as to be able
to use this strategic position to establish
their control elsewhere.

As we've heard, you spoke of three connected
events. How come the authors of
this so-called plan, of which they speak so
self-assuredly, only got around
to making allegations about Bosnia and
Croatia after ten years? Furthermore,
these claims are absurd and nonsensical,
primarily because the entire policy
of the Serbs, Serbia and me personally was in
regard to Croatia and Bosnia
focused on peace, not war. We used all our
influence to achieve peace as soon
as possible.

At the very beginning of the conflict in
Croatia, we advocated a political
solution. Based on that proposal, the UN
Protected Areas were established and
the situation calmed down immediately. On
March 24, 1992, the late Croatian
leader Tudjman spoke to his nation from the
Ban Jelacic Square [in Zagreb],
saying literally: "There would not have been
a war had Croatia not wanted it,
but we judged this was the only way to
achieve independence."

There would have certainly been no war had
Croatia not wished for it. Serbia
never participated in that war anyway. It was
an internal conflict.

But why did Croatia want war? Most certainly
not in order for the Croatian
people to use their right to
self-determination and secession (Macedonia,
for example, claimed that right and separated
from Yugoslavia), but to achieve
its goal of expelling half a million Serbs
from Croatia - Serbian Krajina -
who for centuries lived there on their own
land, and not as occupiers.

Until the arrival of that Croatian regime
that wanted war and so admitted
publicly, Croatia had a Constitution
describing it as a state of Croats,
Serbs and other peoples residing therein.
That Constitution was changed.
Serbs lost their rights and their constituent
status in Croatia, and they
rose in rebellion. At the time, few in Serbia
even knew that Serbs lived in
some part of Croatia.

You speak of the plan according to which,
with German support, Croatia was
prematurely recognized at the end of 1991,
without waiting for a political
solution, which sparked a confrontation in
which Serbia - I repeat - only
contributed in finding a peaceful solution as
soon as possible. Even the
Croatian government never accused us of
responsibility for that conflict, and
now I hear, here, today, that we had some
sort of a plan for that?

There was, in fact, a plan - a clear plan
aimed against a state that was, I
would say, at the time a model of future
European federalism. That state was
Yugoslavia, in which multiple nations lived
in a federation, on equal
footing, successfully, with the ability to
prosper, develop, and show the
entire world that coexistence was possible.

All the time we fought for Yugoslavia, for
the preservation of Yugoslavia.
After all, all the facts prove that what I am
saying is true. Only the
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, which now
exists, retained its ethnic makeup.
There were no expulsions, from the beginning
to the end of the Yugoslav
crisis. All other republics changed their
ethnic makeup. Half a million Serbs
were expelled from Croatia and we all know
what happened in Bosnia, not to
mention other parts of Yugoslavia.

Therefore, I would say this is a malicious,
utterly hostile process aimed at
justifying the crime against my country,
using this 'court' as a weapon
against my country and my people.

Look at Bosnia-Herzegovina. Over there, we
tried from the very beginning to
secure peace. What happened to the Cutillero
Plan, which everyone had backed?
The Islamist Bosnian government rejected it
at the urging of the U.S.
Ambassador and the conflict began. How can
Serbia be accused of anything in
Bosnia, when it is well known that,
attempting to use our influence for
peace, we not only backed all the peace
proposals but also tried to help
implement them?

In 1993, in Athens, there was a meeting at
which the Vance-Owen Peace Plan
was signed. Everybody signed it. I went to
Pale with [Greek Prime Minister]
Mitsotakis and former Yugoslav president
Dobrica Cosic, and we advocated the
acceptance of this plan. Unfortunately, it
was rejected - on May 3 or May 5,
1993, I don't remember exactly. Even then we
initiated a blockade of the Serb
Republic, in order to force its leadership to
accept the peace plan. This was
Serbia's role - to attempt to achieve
peace.

We had constantly emphasized that the only
formula for achieving peace in
Bosnia was to equally protect the interests
of all three peoples in
Bosnia-Herzegovina: Serbs, Muslims and
Croats. The Dayton Agreement succeeded
because that formula was accepted - because
the national interests of all
three peoples were protected equally.

Now I hear that Dayton was supposed to
discuss Kosovo. That is nonsense. The
Dayton talks were convened to establish peace
in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and no
one even thought of addressing the issue of
Kosovo. It has been an internal
issue of Serbia, and no one could have even
dreamed that someone would
attempt to internationalize it.

You cannot, in any way, link Serbia or the
Serbian policy with any kind of
crimes. You especially cannot legally claim,
ten years later, something that
no one ever alleged about us, even then. We
were accorded only respect and
appreciation for the gigantic efforts Serbia
and the Serbian policy made to
achieve peace.

Speaking of Bosnia, do you know that 70,000
Muslim refugees sought sanctuary
in Serbia during the Bosnian conflict? Do you
think someone would flee their
home and take refuge in the very territory
from which they were endangered?
How many lives did we save, how many of your
hostages did we rescue from
Bosnia - from UN peacekeepers to pilots -
and how many peace treaties did we
insist on and make possible? Eventually, we
were the most responsible for the
success of the Dayton talks and the peace
that ensued.

It was a total peace, a complete relaxation
of tensions, and then... I will
tell you how it all began in Kosovo. Because
of the plan to establish control
of the Balkans, the territory of the former
Yugoslavia, efforts were made to
destabilize Kosovo at precisely the time when
it seemed everything would be
resolved peacefully.

(CONTINUED PART 2)

www.icdsm.org

: Objavljeno 04 februar 2002

Subject: Part 2 of 2 - PRESIDENT
MILOSEVIC IN THE HAGUE JAN. 30, 2002 - TRANSCRIPT
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 22:58:39 EST
From: JaredI@...
To: JaredI@...

Part 2 of 2 - PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC IN
THE HAGUE JAN. 30, 2002 - TRANSCRIPT

In November 1997, there was a summit
meeting in Crete of all heads of state
and governments of Southeastern Europe.
Back then, we discussed - at our
initiative - the elimination of
barriers, tariffs, integration within
Southeastern Europe and improving our
mutual cooperation. I had a direct
dialog with the Albanian Prime Minister
Fatos Nano. We spoke of normalizing
our relations, eliminating visas and
tariffs, developing transport and trade
links, et cetera. Fatos Nano and I went
before the TV cameras and he then
said, after talking about cooperation
and improving our mutual relations,
that Kosovo was an internal Serbian
matter. This was a promise of peace, of
peaceful solutions to all these problems.

But this was an alarm for all the
powers that continued to act criminally
against my country, trying to
destabilize Yugoslavia and intervene
the way they did. A month or two afterwards,
we received a letter from [German
Foreign Minister] Kinkel and [French
Foreign Minister] Vedrine saying they
were worried about the situation in
Kosovo. For ten years since the time you
claim Serbia "seized" control of its
own territory, there were no murders,
no expulsions, no plunder, no arson, no
arrests in Kosovo. We did not have a
single political prisoner in Yugoslavia
- not one. Kosovo had 20 newspapers
and other publications in Albanian,
which one could buy at every street
corner. Not a single issue, not a
single copy, was ever banned. Albanian
political parties, even separatist
ones, worked freely. Someone here said
we tolerated them. No, our view was that
everything should be permitted - except
violence.

Then the powers behind Yugoslavia's
destruction and occupation rounded up
criminals throughout Western Europe and
sent them to Kosovo to establish a
terrorist organization. They began
terrorist attacks in the spring of 1998.
Then they were crushed. By the fall of
1998, they were completely eliminated,
surrendering by the truckload the
weapons they had smuggled in.

Within that year, they mostly killed
Albanians. I do not have specific
figures with me, since I did not know I
would be given a chance to speak
today. I was notified of my appearance
here only yesterday, and I did not
know what would be discussed. So I do
not have all the specific information,
but I will tell you what I do have. Two
and a half times...

Claude Jorda:

Mr. Milosevic, please allow...

Pres. Milosevic:

... more Albanians than Serbs were
killed by the terrorists in 1998. They
killed Albanian police officers, postal
carriers, forest rangers, even
retirees - only because they received
their retirement checks from the state.
They were attempting to strike terror
in the hearts of Albanians as well as
kill Serbs. We protected our citizens
- both Serbs and Albanians - from
terrorism, and this operation was
completed by the fall of 1998. Then [US
envoy] Holbrooke came to demand a
Verification Mission in order to create
a pretext for attacking Yugoslavia. Let
me tell you....

Claude Jorda:

Mr. Milosevic, allow me just a minute.
Please. Just one minute. I will not
take away your time, I will certainly
give it to you. Even this International
Tribunal whose legality you dispute is
giving you the opportunity to fully
state your case. It seems to me, first
of all, that you are ready to start
with the trial - even today, as it
seems. This goes to your credit. You are
ready. But I have to take you back to
the... Please, try not to completely
lose sight of the issue we are discussing
today. We are not the chamber that
will conduct your trial. We understand
well that your central idea is quite
contrary - that this is a victimization
of your country. It has been heard
and understood.

It would be good for you, Mr.
Milosevic, not to deceive yourself about the
chamber that will try you. You have the
same amount of time as the prosecutor
here. As the chairman of this chamber I
guarantee that. Please, do not lose
sight of the topic we are discussing, then.

You have a thesis you are attempting to
defend, and you have that right - and
will have that right. However, I have
to remind you that this Appeals chamber
is facing an important procedural
question. It may not be important to you,
but it is to us, since we are trying to
safeguard the norms of just and
equitable procedure. What we would like
to know is if you would like your
trial for Kosovo to be separate from
the trial for Bosnia and Croatia, or if
you would prefer them to be combined. I
understand that you might answer this
in a roundabout way. I will, of course,
permit you to speak. You are a
defendant who has good mental health
and clarity of thought. Therefore I ask
you to try and answer this question.
Thank you in advance. You have the floor
again.

Pres. Milosevic:

First of all, this is the only time I
have not been interrupted, the first
time I can say something, and I will
use every opportunity to address the
public regarding the crime that is
being perpetrated against my country. I
do this not because of procedure, since
procedure does not interest me, but in
order to answer the attacks against my
country and my people, and the ongoing
crimes against them. I want the public
to know that after the aggression...

Claude Jorda:

Please wait, Mr. Milosevic. You
understand that you have much time at
your disposal, but you will have more when
the trial starts. This is, of course,
not the subject of today's debate.
You have the right to continue. But you
are now addressing the people outside
this courtroom. Mr. Milosevic, I have
to tell you that you will have the
right to address the public. The
international community created this
trial and I certainly wish that all the
rules that apply to the prosecution, to
you and to the civilization are
respected. Today's debate is about
how the trial would take place in
another chamber. I have no intention of
interrupting you and will subtract the
time I used up by my interruptions. You may
proceed now.

Pres. Milosevic:

I want to emphasize that the crime
against my country has continued. The
most recent Serb murdered in Kosovo that
I've heard of was killed on Christmas
this year. Some 350,000 were expelled
from Kosovo under UN auspices, while
Albanian terrorist activities were
protected by the UN. Since the arrival of
the so-called UN peacekeepers that were
obligated by [UN Security Council]
Resolution 1244 to guarantee the
security of person and property to
every inhabitant of Kosovo, Albanian
terrorists have expelled 350,000 people
and torched tens of thousands of homes.
Sometimes they would burn 50, 60, all
the Serbian houses in a village, in plain
sight of the [UN] troops. These are in
fact occupation troops, who came [to
Kosovo] under the UN banner only to
transform themselves overnight into
occupiers and allies of the terrorists
who killed, who mutilated and butchered
so many, and burned so much, and
continue to do so even today. And they
say they were unaware this was happening.

Can anyone believe that the troops over
there could be unaware that tens of
thousands of homes were being torched?
Can someone damage and destroy...since
the UN troops came, 107 Serbian
churches have been destroyed. Can someone
destroy an entire church and burn it
without the UN troops knowing?

This is a "joint criminal enterprise"
- of the forces who committed crimes
against Yugoslavia with the drug-Mafia
and Albanian terrorists in Kosovo, for
the purpose of crimes not only against
the Serbs but all other non-Albanians,
even Catholic Albanians. Even Albanians
who, in any way - such as cashing
their retirement checks - showed any
loyalty to the Republic of Serbia as
their state.

What is happening over there is
practically the rehabilitation of a policy
led by Hitler and Mussolini. This talk
about "Greater Serbia", this alleged
idea that never really existed, is only
raised to mask the creation of
"Greater Albania" - the very same one
that was made by Hitler and Mussolini
in World War Two. Look at it then, and
look at what is being done now, what
they want to seize from Serbia,
Montenegro, Macedonia - tomorrow maybe from
northern Greece, when Greek-Turkish
relations are strained under orders of
the common master.

This is obviously a crime, and the
thread running through it is obviously
a crime against Yugoslavia. I want to
point out that falsifying historical
facts is not easy, though. It is not
easy even when these facts are only
known to a select group of people, and
downright impossible when millions,
entire nations, know the facts. With
all due respect, the real judges in this
trial - not you who wear the robes
- are those who decided to murder
children in my country, who launched
NATO's aggression and dropped 25
thousand tons of bombs in 78 days,
murdering mostly elderly people,
children and women.

They want to play that role. But they
will not be the judges.

The real judge here is the people -
not just the people of Yugoslavia, but
the peoples of all the countries who
care about liberty and equality. Not for
nothing do we have a saying that the
judgment of the people is the judgment
of God. We all face that judgment, not
just me - who is facing an attempt
here to be made responsible instead of
being given recognition - but also
you, and your employers, especially
those who committed crimes against my
country.

Since you want me to request something
of you, let me demand this: set me
free. I demand to be set free because
you and the entire world should know by
now that I will not run from a fight
for my people and my country. I have no
intention of running. It does not serve
the honor of this institution to keep
me imprisoned here, in disgraceful
conditions, in order to deprive me of
equality in stating my arguments -
even if this institution were legal,
and you know very well that it isn't.

For if you didn't know - and I
don't refer to you in particular, but
to the institution - then you would have
accepted the motion from the amici curiae
to seek advisory opinion from the
International Court of Justice on the
legality of this tribunal. You did not
seek it, because the outcome would be
entirely predictable.

Altogether, I think that such a
criminal approach, an attempt to cast
the victim as the culprit, both in regard
to my country, my people and myself,
has not yet been recorded in history.
With that in mind, I consider it both
logical and just to release me
immediately. I will not flee, and I am
ready to enter any of these debates, since
this is one battle which I certainly
have an obligation to fight.

***

Subscribe to the ICDSM email list at
http://www.icdsm.org/maillist.htm
Receive no more than one article per
day.

Click here to send the link to this
article to a friend.

http://www.icdsm.org

: Objavljeno 01 februar 2002

AMSELFELD NEWSLETTER 31.1.2002
________________________

AMSELFELD NEWSLETTER
31.1.2002
http://www.amselfeld.com
________________________

+++ Ab Freitag wieder Konvois von und nach Strpce +++

STRPCE, 31.Januar 2002. Ab dem morgigen Freitag werden wieder
Konvois in den Ort Strpce in der serbischen Provinz Kosovo und Metochien
gelangen können. Dies erklärte heute der Ortsvorsitzende der
demokratischen Partei Slavisa Staletovic. Die KFOR besteht nun nicht
mehr darauf, daß die serbische Bevölkerung den von der UNMIK
zwangseingesetzten albanischen Bürgermeister in den Ort lassen, weswegen
der Ort und seine Bevölkerung sowohl von der KFOR abgeriegelt, als auch
von Albanern blockiert worden war.

STIMME KOSOVOS

+++ Albanischer Schütze von Plemetina gefaßt +++

PLEMETINA, 31.Januar 2002. Der Albaner, der gestern in der
Ortschaft Plemetina auf eine Gruppe serbischer Kinder geschossen hat,
konnte heute festgenommen werden. Glücklicherweise wurde bei dem
hinterhältigen Angriff, den der Albaner aus seinem Auto heraus
ausgeführt hatte, keines der Kinder verletzt.

STIMME KOSOVOS

+++ Neue Kommunalwahlen in Kosovo und Metochien? +++

PRISTINA, 31.Januar 2002. Nach den Worten der UNMIK-Sprecherin
Suzan Manuel wird es im September dieses Jahres neue Kommunalwahlen in
der serbischen Provinz Kosovo und Metochien geben. Die Wahlen werden
erneut von den UN und der OSZE organisiert werden.

B92

Redaktion Amselfeld
leserbriefe@...

------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Um von dieser Mailingliste entfernt zu werden,
klicken Sie den unteren Link an:
http://amselfeld.com/cgi-bin/mail.cgi?jugocoord@...

: Objavljeno 01 februar 2002

Data:
01/02/2002 15:36

Da:
YugoEmb-Ottawa

A:

Oggetto:
I D S, Feb. 1

sposta nella cartella:

YUGOSLAV DAILY SURVEY

Belgrade, 01. 2. 2002. No. 3639

C O N T E N T S :
FROM THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF YUGOSLAVIA
BASIS FOR NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE IMF DETERMINED
YUGOSLAVIA-SPAIN:YUGOSLAVIA BELONGS TO EUROPEAN UNION
YUGOSLAV PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL RECEIVES RUSSIAN, BOSNIA, BELORUS AMBASSADORS
YUGOSLAV GOVERNMENT TO MODERNIZE PROTECTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE BORDER WITH
KOSOVO

REPUBLIC OF SERBIA
DJINDJIC, DJELIC AND PITIC IN NEW YORK
FOREIGN CONSULTANTS ON JUDICIAL REFORM BODY
CANAK, DJUKIC RECEIVE UKRAINE'S AMBASSADOR
PRIVATIZATION INITIATED IN 30 VOJVODINA FIRMS
HUNDREDS OF MINES DESTROYED IN SOUTHERN SERBIA
BELGRADE FILM FESTIVAL "FEST" BEGINS

KOSOVO-METOHIJA
UN - ARRESTS OF KLA MEMBERS NOT CONNECTED WITH KOSOVO PROTECTION CORPS
BRUSSELS SHOULD CONSIDER POLITICAL SOLUTION FOR KOSOVO-METOHIJA
THAQI PARTY WARNS INTERNATIONAL AUTHORITIES
PROTESTERS BLOCK CENTRAL PRISTINA
ALBANIANS FIRE AT SERBIAN SCHOOL PUPILS
ONLY HUMANITARIAN CONVOYS ABLE TO REACH SERB ENCLAVE IN KOSOVO
AFTER TWO YEARS, SERBIAN REPRESENTATIVE IN PRISTINA MUNICIPALITY
FROM THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF
YUGOSLAVIA

BASIS FOR NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE IMF DETERMINED
BELGRADE, Jan. 31 (Beta) - The Yugoslav government determined on Jan. 31
the basis for negotiations between the Yugoslav delegation and the IMF
mission on results of the standby arrangement and a new three-year
financial arrangement.
The closing of a new arrangement will enable the realization of the
agreement reached with the Paris Club of creditors on the writing-off of
the majority of the Yugoslav debt. The arrangement will also mean support
to economic and structural reforms, the Federal Information Bureau said in
an announcement.
Yugoslav Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Economic Relations
Miroljub Labus will lead the Yugoslav delegation in talks with the IMF.
The government has also set the basis for negotiations with the
International Association for Development, for the purpose of reaching an
agreement on a development loan for the modernization of the Yugolav
customs service , that is, Serbia and Montenegro.
A report on the increase of EU donations to EUR120 million, out of which
EUR75 million have already been used, was also adopted.

YUGOSLAVIA-SPAIN:YUGOSLAVIA BELONGS TO EUROPEAN UNION
BELGRADE, Jan 31 (Tanjug) - Yugoslav Prime Minister Dragisa Pesic and
Spanish Ambassador Mariano Jesus Garcia Munoz discussed possibilities for
promoting bilateral political and economic ties and for Spain, which
currently presides the European Union, to speed up Yugoslavia's access to
the European integrations.
"Our strategic foreign policy goal is to join the European Union," Pesic
said and added that in this process Spain could play an important role as
the EU president.
Both sides voiced their interest in bilateral economic cooperation and said
that their respective governments had taken a series of concrete measures
aimed at creating a legislative
infrastructure that would intensify this cooperation. Contacts among
political officials are also stimulating in this context, Pesic said and
invited Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar to visit
Yugoslavia.
Spain supports the preservation of the Yugoslav federation, which it
specially stressed in the programme it plans to carry out during its term
as EU president, and an indication of this commitment is the fact that
Yugoslavia is the only country specifically mentioned in the programme.
Ambassador Munoz expects EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana to give his
full contribution to this end, the Yugoslav prime minister's office said in
a statement.

YUGOSLAV PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL RECEIVES RUSSIAN, BOSNIA, BELORUS AMBASSADORS
BELGRADE, Jan 31 (Tanjug) - The speaker of the Yugoslav parliament's lower
house, Dragoljub Micunovic, on Thursday received the ambassador of the
Russian Federation to Yugoslavia, Valery Egoshkin, expressing gratitude for
the results of his mission in Yugoslavia which marked the relations between
the two countries and their peoples.
Micunovic also received on separate visits the newly-appointed ambassadors
of Bosnia-Herzegovina and the Belarus in Yugoslavia - Zeljko Komsic and
Vladimir Mackiyevich respectively, to discuss the development of bilateral
and international cooepration.

YUGOSLAV GOVERNMENT TO MODERNIZE PROTECTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE BORDER WITH
KOSOVO
BELGRADE, Jan 31 (Tanjug) - A Yugoslav government session, chaired on
Thursday by Prime Minister Dragisa Pesic, adopted the project Modernization
and Technical Equipping of Control and Security Systems for the Protection
of the Administrative Border with Kosovo-Metohija.
The project aims to apply modern technical means, with reduced manpower, to
prevent terrorism and render more efficient the struggle against crime and
the illegal transfer of goods and people in this region outside the
designated border crossings, the federal Information Secretariat said in a
statement.
"The system will secure the stability and control of the administrative
border with Kosovo-Metohija in keeping with the prospects and criteria of
the international community for managing the crisis in Southeast Europe,
and contribute to stepping up the security of the entire region," the
statement said.

REPUBLIC OF SERBIA

DJINDJIC, DJELIC AND PITIC IN NEW YORK
NEW YORK, Jan. 31 (Beta) - Serbian Premier Zoran Djindjic and Serbian
ministers of finance and foreign economic relations, Bozidar Djelic and
Goran Pitic, flew to New York on Jan. 31 to attend the World Economic
Forum, an annual meeting of world political and economic officials and
representatives of large companies and leading non-governmental organizations.
Serbian government representatives will participate in the formal part of
the gathering entitled "Management in Crucial Times: A Vision of a Common
Future," and hold separate meetings with politicians and influential
businessmen, minister Djelic told BETA.
"It is a traditional meeting on key topics in the world and an
excellent opportunity to meet decision makers," said Djelic.
According to Djelic, the Serbian premier will talk to several prime
ministers and world leaders, including NATO general secretary George Robertson.
He added that government representatives would talk to representatives of
leading companies and potential investors in the Serbian economy, including
the leaders of the Swiss company "Nestle", the Italian Institute for
Industry Reconstruction, presidents of major banks companies for technical
production and cement factories...
Djelic said his collocutors would include the Bulgarian and Polish finance
ministers, as well as the president of the London stock exchange.

FOREIGN CONSULTANTS ON JUDICIAL REFORM BODY
BELGRADE, Jan. 31 (B92) The Serbian Government has appointed a number of
international consultants to a new Council for Reform of the Judiciary.
They include representatives of the OSCE, the American Bar Association
Central and Eastern European Law Initiative, the Council of Europe, the
European Agency for Reconstruction, the UN and the Fund for an Open Society.
The foreign consultants will join a number of senior local legal figures
with Serbian Justice Minister Vladan Batic in the chair.

CANAK, DJUKIC RECEIVE UKRAINE'S AMBASSADOR
NOVI SAD, Jan 31 (Tanjug) - Vojvodina parliament speaker Nenad Canak and
provincial premier Djordje Djukic on Thursday held separate meetings with
Ukraine's Ambassador Anatoly Shostak.
A statement received by the Vojvodina parliament speaker's office said that
Shostak "welcomed a long tradition of observation of national minority
rights in Vojvodina and called for support for a speedier inclusion of
ethnic Ukrainians and Ruthenians in modern social processes."
In his meeting with the Vojvodina premier, Shostak voiced special interest
in cooperation in the field of agriculture, according to a statement issued
by the Vojvodina government

PRIVATIZATION INITIATED IN 30 VOJVODINA FIRMS
NOVI SAD, Jan 31 (Tanjug) - In Vojvodina, Serbia's northern province,
privatization has been initiated in 30 firms in keeping with the provisions
of the new law, Vojvodina Executive Council President Djordjc Djukic said
on Thursday.
Djukic said that the Serbian Economy and Privatization Ministry has
initiated privatization, via a public bid, in nine firms, in 15 cases the
firms themselves launched the privatization process, while six firms were
stimulated to start privatization by potential buyers.
The aquisition value of these firms, which employ a total of 13.762
workers, has been estimated at 216.8 million euros, while the capital put
up for sale amounts to 144.6 million euros, Djukic set out.

HUNDREDS OF MINES DESTROYED IN SOUTHERN SERBIA
BUJANOVAC, Jan 31 (Tanjug) - Hundreds of anti-tank and anti-personnel mines
and 221 kg of explosives planted by the terrorist "LIberation Army of
Presevo, Bujanovac and Medvedja" have been found and destroyed in the
Bujanovac municipality in southern Serbia, the Bujanovac press center said
Thursday.
There were 304 anti-tank and 584 anti-personnel mines, it was noted at a
meeting attended by members of the Yugoslav and Serbian governments'
Coordinating Team Milovan Coguric and Mica Markovic and representatives of
the Yugoslav Army, European Union, UNHCR, UNICEF and Red Cross Regional
Committee.
The danger has, however, not yet been removed, as an estimated 1,000 mines
or explosive devices are still around, Coguric said, adding that the
people, especially children, should be warned of the danger.

BELGRADE FILM FESTIVAL "FEST" BEGINS
BELGRADE, Jan. 31 (Beta) - The 30th Belgrade international film festival,
will begin on Feb. 1 at the Sava centre with the screening of the Italian
movie "The Son's Room", directed by Nanni Moretti, 75 movies grouped into
eight programs will be presented.
FEST 2002 organizers did not want to disclose who would open the festival
before the Moretti movie was screened. The movie was awarded the FIPRESCI
prize in Cannes.
The organizers told a press conference that the arrival of 19 guests has
been confirmed up to now, including Danijel Hocevar from Slovenia. Also in
attendance are the producers of the movies "An Ode to Presern" and "Bread
and Milk," as well the directors of the movies, Martin Srebotnjak and Jan
Cvitkovic, the producer of "Apocalypse Now", Kim Auberey, director and the
script writer of "Der Chinesische Markt", Zoran Solomun from Germany, and
the director and script writer of "Firefly Dreams", John Williams, from
Great Britain.
Film premieres will be held in the Sava centre, Dvorana kulturnog centra
(DKC) and Dom Omladine (DOB) and second screenings in the Yugoslav
cinematheque, DKC and DOB.
The vast number are co-productions (24), as well as 11 American, 7 German,
4 French and 4 Japanese, 2 Austrian, 2 Iranian, 2 Italian, 2 Canadian, 2
Slovenian and 2 Swiss movies, and one movie a piece from a further 13
countries.
Serbian distributors secured 20 movies, whilst the remainder were secured
with the help of foreign cultural centers in Belgrade and certain embassies.

KOSOVO-METOHIJA

UN - ARRESTS OF KLA MEMBERS NOT CONNECTED WITH KOSOVO PROTECTION CORPS
PRISTINA, Feb 1 (Tanjug) - United Nations Kosovo-Metohija administration
UNMIK deputy chief Charles Brayshaw said in Pristina on Thursday that the
arrests of three former members of the Kosovo Liberation Army (UCK) are not
in any way connected with the Kosovo
Protection Corps (KPC).
The arrested persons have been charged with grave crimes committed during
the period from September 1998 until June 1999. These were personal actions
and a sufficient number of testimonies have been taken from witnesses, so
that it is up to the court to decide whether they are gulty or not,
Brayshaw said during a visit to the KPC.
An international judge in the province yesterday set an additional 30 days
of detention and ordered the opening of an investigation on war crimes for
the three Kosovo Albanians who were arrested in Pristina and Podujevo on
Monday, an UNMIK spokesman said.
Thousands of ethnic Albanians protested against these arrests in Pristina
and Podujevo these days.

BRUSSELS SHOULD CONSIDER POLITICAL SOLUTION FOR KOSOVO-METOHIJA
BERLIN, Feb 1 (Tanjug) - It is necessary that Brussels deals with the issue
of a long-term political solution for Kosovo and Metohija, which will not
be realized without a European perspective, a source close to new United
Nations envoy in the southern Serbian province
Michael Steiner has said.
The source said on Thursday that it was important for Brussels to do this
in order to quell nationalistic tendencies in the region and to assess
relativistically the issue of the independence of this territory.
The unnamed UN representative said one of Steiner's main tasks would be to
establish stable authorities in the province.
The period until the autonomy of the province is defined cannot be
specified, so that the two-year postponement asked by Serbian Prime
Minister Zoran Djindjic is unrealistic, the official said.
The international community will not withdraw from the province if Kosovo
is not given a European perspective, the source said.
Steiner will begin his term in office in Pristina in mid-February. He has
completed consultations with European Union foreign policy commissioner
Chris Patten in Brussels.

THAQI PARTY WARNS INTERNATIONAL AUTHORITIES
PRISTINA, Jan. 31 (B92) The Democratic Party of Kosovo this evening
accused International civilian and military authorities in the province
that they were endangering safety and the political situation in Kosovo by
arresting former members of the Kosovo Liberation Army.
Party president Hashim Thaqi is a former leader of the Liberation Army,
which was disbanded after the arrival of international peacekeepers in 1999.
The party claimed that by arresting the three, UNMIK and KFOR were
destabilising the situation in Kosovo.

PROTESTERS BLOCK CENTRAL PRISTINA
PRISTINA, Jan. 31 (B92) More than two thousand Albanian demonstrators have
blocked the centre of Pristina for the second consecutive day protesting at
the arrest of former leaders of the Kosovo Liberation Army.
UN police and KFOR troops arrested the three Kosovo Albanians on Tuesday,
charging them with war crimes committed in 1998 and 1999.
They are accused of abductions assaults and murders of Albanians from the
Podujevo area who did not agree with Kosovo Liberation Army policies.

ALBANIANS FIRE AT SERBIAN SCHOOL PUPILS
PRISTINA, Jan. 31 (Beta) - Members of Kosovo police arrested two Kosovo
Albanians suspected of having fired at pupils of a Serbian school in
Plemetina, KFOR announced on Jan. 31.
It was reported that the school in Plemetina, attended by some 100 Serbian
children, had been fired at on Jan. 31 at around noon, from a car carrying
four passengers.
The incident was probably provoked by a conflict between local Serb and
Albanian children who had thrown stones at each other, reads the KFOR
statement, adding that one of the arrested Albanians was the father of one
of the boys who threw stones. A gun was found in the arrested persons' car.
KFOR added that some 70 Serbs gathered in front of the school afterwards,
but were dispersed by KFOR in a bid to "quell disturbances."

ONLY HUMANITARIAN CONVOYS ABLE TO REACH SERB ENCLAVE IN KOSOVO
STRPCE, Kosovo, Jan 31 (Tanjug) - KFOR will provide an escort only for the
so-called humanitarian convoys going to Strpce, the Serb enclave in Kosovo,
US KFOR Colonel Larry Saul told Tanjug on Thursday.
Since last week, when there were problems, peace was violated and the radio
and television described it as violence, Col. Saul set out adding that KFOR
then halted escorts for some convoys out of security reasons, but would
continue providing the same for humanitarian convoys and medical cases.
Strpce, the biggest Serb enclave in Kosovo with 12,000 Serb inhabitants,
has practically been sealed off from the rest of the world for the past
nine days after regular convoys were halted due to incidents and KFOR
violence.
Serb sources in Strpce confirmed to Tanjug today that on Tuesday KFOR took
Jelica Andjelkovic, 60, to the US Bondsteel base where this elderly woman
was interrogated for three hours, after which she was returned to Strpce.
On Jan 22, during Serb demonstarations in Strpce, Jelica was in the front
lines expressing her pain for the loss of her husband, son and son-in-law,
kidnapped by the ethnic Albanian terrorists two years ago and who were
never seen again.
In Bondsteel, Jelica was interrogated by a woman officer who was very rough
and threatened her not to appear at protests ever again.
The KFOR and UNMIK police photographed all the people in the front ranks of
the Jan 22 protest in Strpce, and now many fear new arrests.

AFTER TWO YEARS, SERBIAN REPRESENTATIVE IN PRISTINA MUNICIPALITY
PRISTINA, Jan. 31 (Beta) - Zorica Velic was appointed on Jan. 31 as
Pristina municipality vice-president. It is the first time following a two
year boycott that a Serb has beed appointed to a managerial position in the
municipality.
After the appointment, Velic told the press in Pristina "I am happy to
become vice-president of a municipality and a town in which I was born."
In the Pristina municipality, Zorica Velic will represent Serbs who, after
the 1999 war in Kosovo, mostly live in near-by villages. She announced she
would engage in the democratization of civic life in the municipality.
Last year, UNMIK appointed three Serbs for MPs to the Pristina city
council. At the constitutive session, Albanian MPs alleged that Serbian
representative Slavko Trajkovic had committed war crimes in Kosovo, leading
to Serb representatives ending their attendance at sessions.

Data:
01/02/2002 15:36

Da:
YugoEmb-Ottawa

A:

Oggetto:
I D S, Feb. 1

sposta nella cartella:

YUGOSLAV DAILY SURVEY

Belgrade, 01. 2. 2002. No. 3639

C O N T E N T S :
FROM THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF YUGOSLAVIA
BASIS FOR NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE IMF DETERMINED
YUGOSLAVIA-SPAIN:YUGOSLAVIA BELONGS TO EUROPEAN UNION
YUGOSLAV PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL RECEIVES RUSSIAN, BOSNIA, BELORUS AMBASSADORS
YUGOSLAV GOVERNMENT TO MODERNIZE PROTECTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE BORDER WITH
KOSOVO

REPUBLIC OF SERBIA
DJINDJIC, DJELIC AND PITIC IN NEW YORK
FOREIGN CONSULTANTS ON JUDICIAL REFORM BODY
CANAK, DJUKIC RECEIVE UKRAINE'S AMBASSADOR
PRIVATIZATION INITIATED IN 30 VOJVODINA FIRMS
HUNDREDS OF MINES DESTROYED IN SOUTHERN SERBIA
BELGRADE FILM FESTIVAL "FEST" BEGINS

KOSOVO-METOHIJA
UN - ARRESTS OF KLA MEMBERS NOT CONNECTED WITH KOSOVO PROTECTION CORPS
BRUSSELS SHOULD CONSIDER POLITICAL SOLUTION FOR KOSOVO-METOHIJA
THAQI PARTY WARNS INTERNATIONAL AUTHORITIES
PROTESTERS BLOCK CENTRAL PRISTINA
ALBANIANS FIRE AT SERBIAN SCHOOL PUPILS
ONLY HUMANITARIAN CONVOYS ABLE TO REACH SERB ENCLAVE IN KOSOVO
AFTER TWO YEARS, SERBIAN REPRESENTATIVE IN PRISTINA MUNICIPALITY
FROM THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF
YUGOSLAVIA

BASIS FOR NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE IMF DETERMINED
BELGRADE, Jan. 31 (Beta) - The Yugoslav government determined on Jan. 31
the basis for negotiations between the Yugoslav delegation and the IMF
mission on results of the standby arrangement and a new three-year
financial arrangement.
The closing of a new arrangement will enable the realization of the
agreement reached with the Paris Club of creditors on the writing-off of
the majority of the Yugoslav debt. The arrangement will also mean support
to economic and structural reforms, the Federal Information Bureau said in
an announcement.
Yugoslav Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Economic Relations
Miroljub Labus will lead the Yugoslav delegation in talks with the IMF.
The government has also set the basis for negotiations with the
International Association for Development, for the purpose of reaching an
agreement on a development loan for the modernization of the Yugolav
customs service , that is, Serbia and Montenegro.
A report on the increase of EU donations to EUR120 million, out of which
EUR75 million have already been used, was also adopted.

YUGOSLAVIA-SPAIN:YUGOSLAVIA BELONGS TO EUROPEAN UNION
BELGRADE, Jan 31 (Tanjug) - Yugoslav Prime Minister Dragisa Pesic and
Spanish Ambassador Mariano Jesus Garcia Munoz discussed possibilities for
promoting bilateral political and economic ties and for Spain, which
currently presides the European Union, to speed up Yugoslavia's access to
the European integrations.
"Our strategic foreign policy goal is to join the European Union," Pesic
said and added that in this process Spain could play an important role as
the EU president.
Both sides voiced their interest in bilateral economic cooperation and said
that their respective governments had taken a series of concrete measures
aimed at creating a legislative
infrastructure that would intensify this cooperation. Contacts among
political officials are also stimulating in this context, Pesic said and
invited Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar to visit
Yugoslavia.
Spain supports the preservation of the Yugoslav federation, which it
specially stressed in the programme it plans to carry out during its term
as EU president, and an indication of this commitment is the fact that
Yugoslavia is the only country specifically mentioned in the programme.
Ambassador Munoz expects EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana to give his
full contribution to this end, the Yugoslav prime minister's office said in
a statement.

YUGOSLAV PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL RECEIVES RUSSIAN, BOSNIA, BELORUS AMBASSADORS
BELGRADE, Jan 31 (Tanjug) - The speaker of the Yugoslav parliament's lower
house, Dragoljub Micunovic, on Thursday received the ambassador of the
Russian Federation to Yugoslavia, Valery Egoshkin, expressing gratitude for
the results of his mission in Yugoslavia which marked the relations between
the two countries and their peoples.
Micunovic also received on separate visits the newly-appointed ambassadors
of Bosnia-Herzegovina and the Belarus in Yugoslavia - Zeljko Komsic and
Vladimir Mackiyevich respectively, to discuss the development of bilateral
and international cooepration.

YUGOSLAV GOVERNMENT TO MODERNIZE PROTECTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE BORDER WITH
KOSOVO
BELGRADE, Jan 31 (Tanjug) - A Yugoslav government session, chaired on
Thursday by Prime Minister Dragisa Pesic, adopted the project Modernization
and Technical Equipping of Control and Security Systems for the Protection
of the Administrative Border with Kosovo-Metohija.
The project aims to apply modern technical means, with reduced manpower, to
prevent terrorism and render more efficient the struggle against crime and
the illegal transfer of goods and people in this region outside the
designated border crossings, the federal Information Secretariat said in a
statement.
"The system will secure the stability and control of the administrative
border with Kosovo-Metohija in keeping with the prospects and criteria of
the international community for managing the crisis in Southeast Europe,
and contribute to stepping up the security of the entire region," the
statement said.

REPUBLIC OF SERBIA

DJINDJIC, DJELIC AND PITIC IN NEW YORK
NEW YORK, Jan. 31 (Beta) - Serbian Premier Zoran Djindjic and Serbian
ministers of finance and foreign economic relations, Bozidar Djelic and
Goran Pitic, flew to New York on Jan. 31 to attend the World Economic
Forum, an annual meeting of world political and economic officials and
representatives of large companies and leading non-governmental organizations.
Serbian government representatives will participate in the formal part of
the gathering entitled "Management in Crucial Times: A Vision of a Common
Future," and hold separate meetings with politicians and influential
businessmen, minister Djelic told BETA.
"It is a traditional meeting on key topics in the world and an
excellent opportunity to meet decision makers," said Djelic.
According to Djelic, the Serbian premier will talk to several prime
ministers and world leaders, including NATO general secretary George Robertson.
He added that government representatives would talk to representatives of
leading companies and potential investors in the Serbian economy, including
the leaders of the Swiss company "Nestle", the Italian Institute for
Industry Reconstruction, presidents of major banks companies for technical
production and cement factories...
Djelic said his collocutors would include the Bulgarian and Polish finance
ministers, as well as the president of the London stock exchange.

FOREIGN CONSULTANTS ON JUDICIAL REFORM BODY
BELGRADE, Jan. 31 (B92) The Serbian Government has appointed a number of
international consultants to a new Council for Reform of the Judiciary.
They include representatives of the OSCE, the American Bar Association
Central and Eastern European Law Initiative, the Council of Europe, the
European Agency for Reconstruction, the UN and the Fund for an Open Society.
The foreign consultants will join a number of senior local

: Objavljeno 01 februar 2002

Data:
01/02/2002 14:35

Da:
w.schulz@...

A:
w.schulz@...

Oggetto:
[WG: WG: [JUGOINFO] Newsletter FREE SLOBO ! - n° 8]

sposta nella cartella:

============================================================

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: jugocoord@... [mailto:jugocoord@...]
Gesendet: Freitag, 1. Februar 2002 10:15
An: Ova adresa el. pošte je zaštićena od spambotova. Omogućite JavaScript da biste je videli.
Cc: jugoinfo@...
Betreff: [JUGOINFO] Newsletter FREE SLOBO ! - n° 8

Data:
01/02/2002 00:58

Da:
ICDSM Section Francophone

A:
info@... , lucmichelbxl@...

Oggetto:
Newsletter FREE SLOBO ! - n° 8

sposta nella cartella:

FREE SLOBO !

Lettre d'information de la Section francophone de
l'ICDSM
Newsletter of the frenchspeaking section of ICDSM

N° 8 ? 1er Février/February 2002
============================================
Webmaster ? Editeur responsable :
Luc MICHEL - email : lucmichelbxl@...
============================================
Dans ce numéro 8 vous pourez lire ?
In this number 8 you could read :

- MEETING OF LONDON : MESSAGE OF SUPORT OF THE
FRENCHSPEAKING SECTION OF THE ICDSM
- MEETING OF LONDON : OPEN LETTER FROM IRELAND
- SUPORT FROM ARGENTINA : « FELICITO A LA LISTA POR LA
DIFUSION DE ESTAS INFORMACIONES »
- "JUDGE IS ENGLISH, PROSECUTOR IS ENGLISH..." :
MILOSEVIC DEFIES HIS NATO JUDGES
- BACK IN YUGOSLAVIA, LAYOFFS AND STRIKES

============================================

MEETING OF LONDON :
MESSAGE OF SUPORT OF THE FRENCHSPEAKING SECTION OF THE
ICDSM

Dear comrades
Many regrets no to be with you this day !
Greatings from our militants of Belgium, France and
Switzerland to all of you, and particularly to
Christopher Black and all the British team of CDSM.
A few words first to remember you the Symposium
organised in next 2 march in Berlin by our comrades of
the Germanspeaking Section of ICDSM, with our
participation.

Since its creation by the NATO, the so-called
?International Criminal Tribunal for former
Yugoslavia? (ICTY) is a war machine leaded against the
Serbian People and its defenders, in Yugoslavia and in
Republika Srpska (Bosnia). Directly financed by NATO,
the ICTY and his slavish magistrates abiding by the
orders of Washington, is a shame to all the magistracy
and the international judicial world.
The proceedings they use ? secret charging, anonymous
accounts without any proofs, kidnapping of the accused
regardless of the international law, automatic
presumption of guiltiness of the accused,
investigations in accusation and not in defence, and
so on. ? remind us of the sinister inquisition and
would deserve a non-admissibility of the charging in
any independent court of law , starting with those in
the US.
The detention conditions in the ICTY jails are also
outrageous. Especially the medical help brought to the
prisoners , the behaviour of the medical staff of the
ITCY prison is also a shame to all the medical world.
These are instances that are enough as proofs.
The moral loneliness of the Serbian prisoners, victims
of an incessant manhunt, is terrible. Adding to a
detention duration abnormally long and contrary to the
disposals of the European Convention of Human Rights.
It?s why we must, as a duty, help them and support
them.

The president MILOSEVIC is today the first of these
Serbian prisoners.
With the extradition of MILOSEVIC, the pro--American
muppets who govern Yugoslavia and Serbia since the
rampant coup of last October 2000 have just thrown
definitely the mask.
They have exchanged Milosevic against a thick handful
of dollars, as they had already arrest him in April
2000 for the same motives. Thirty coins of Judas for
the Serbian traitors !
The DOS raped the constitution that forbidden the
extradition of the national Yugoslavian while adopting
an unconstitutional decree. The DOS raped the right
while transgressing the decision of the Yugoslavian
supreme constitutional Court that had just suspended
this decree. The DOS raped the formal guarantees of
the Yugoslavian and international right that open ways
of appeal to all menaced person of extradition
(procedures legally hired by Milosevic). The DOS
raped the democratic rules that confide to the
parliament, where the Kollaboses of the DOS are
minority, the voting of a constitutional modification.

Yugoslavia is not anymore a state of right. It is a
?bananas? republic, governed by a junta solded to the
imperialism and the colonialisme of NATO and USA.
Milosevic has not been extradited but removed and
delivered illegally to the TPY, organ of repression of
the NATO.
Today, the president Milosevic is the first resistant
to the New World Order and the dictatorship of the
NATO.
Today, all free men and womlen must mobilize
themselves to defend the Yugoslavian president : WE
ARE ALL OF MILOSEVICS !

Luc MICHEL, President of the
Frenchspeaking Section of ICDSM.
===========================================

MEETING OF LONDON :
OPEN LETTER FROM IRELAND

Fraternal greetings from Mullingar, Republic of
Ireland.
On the eve of the Public Meeting 1st February 2002
focussing on NATO
responsibility for war crimes in the Balkans and
NATO's diversionary
tactic of apportioning blame to the victims of their
hi tech barbaric
onslaughts we note that a recent survey in England has
ascertained the fact, if fact
it is in this largely fictionalised world, that vast
numbers of people in
Britain no longer choose to tune in to either radio or
television news
bulletins be those bulletins either of the news in
brief kind or fully extended
bulletins.
This, as can be imagined, is causing serious concerns
amongst the ranks
of the manipulators of public opinion whom we prefer
to define as "the
deceivers." French writer and Director of the Ecole
speciale d'architecture Paul
Virilio is the author of sixteen books on sociological
and political subjects
with these books to include War and Cinema, Open Sky
and Strategy of
Deception. The last named book is a trenchant
denunciation of the perpetration of
the Kosovo war laying bare the lie that the West's
intervention in the
Balkans was founded on ethical and humanitarian
grounds.
Virilio, to quote from notes accompanying Strategy of
Deception, has
discerned a sinister innovation in the methods of
waging war:
territorial space is being replaced by orbital space
in which a system of global
telesurveillance is linked to the destructive power of
bombers and
missiles: governments, the military and the media are
becoming part of a seamless
and self justifying process linked by new information
and arms
technologies. The author makes the claim that the
media has a "license to lie." If it
is that the media through its remorseless propagation
of lies and
distortions of the truth eventually allienates more
and more sectors of the
community then the ruling class which is totally
dependent on the media for
proselytising on its behalf and most particularly on
behalf of waging
war for profit will be in very serious trouble indeed.

The need to disseminate alternative information in a
world crying out
for such information has never been greater.
Thank you, whilst on this subject, to the Campaign To
Defend Slobodan
Milosevic and to the PCN-NCP service de presse for
sending us in these
post Strangelovian times and so regularly information
of that very kind.

Good luck for the meeting and we hope there will be a
good attendance.
We hope to make it along to a future meeting.
With our sincere thanks and very best wishes.
June and John Kelly
===========================================

SUPORT FROM ARGENTINA :
« FELICITO A LA LISTA POR LA DIFUSION DE ESTAS
INFORMACIONES »

From M. Gorojovsky
En mi carácter de miembro fundador del Comité
Internacional por la Liberación de Slobodan Milosevic,
felicito a la lista por la
difusión de estas informaciones.
============================================

"JUDGE IS ENGLISH, PROSECUTOR IS ENGLISH..." :
MILOSEVIC DEFIES HIS NATO JUDGES

Via Workers World News Service
Reprinted from the Jan. 24, 2002
issue of Workers World newspaper
By John Catalinotto

Former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic continued
his
defiant stand in an appearance before the NATO-backed
International Criminal Tribunal for the Former
Yugoslavia
(ICTY) in The Hague Jan. 9.
The court reacted as it has in the past. It censored
Milosevic's statements.
The Yugoslav leader has from the beginning refused to
recognize the authority of the ICTY and has said he
will
represent himself during the proceedings.
Under pressure from Washington and other NATO powers,
the
United Nations created the ICTY in 1993. It has
jurisdiction
only over crimes carried out in Yugoslavia by people
from
that region. It refuses to try U.S. or other NATO
officials
for ordering the bombing of civilian targets during
the 1999
war.
The great majority of charges have been brought
against
Serbian people, either those who lived in
Bosnia-Herzegovina
or officials in the Yugoslav or Serbian governments.
The
tribunal barely addresses the many horrific acts
committed
against Serbs during the decade-long civil wars that
fragmented what had been a multinational, socialist
country
based on a federation of six republics. The
dismembering of
Yugoslavia was long a goal of European and U.S.
capital,
which now have the upper hand in the area.
The trial on a set of charges against Milosevic
relating to
Kosovo is scheduled to begin on Feb. 12.
At the Jan. 9 hearing, Judge Richard May restricted
sharply
what Milosevic was allowed to say, repeatedly cutting
him
off.
Milosevic began, "To be precise, concerning what has
been
said today: almost everything we've heard shows that,
in the
guise of having a trial, what is planned here is to
carry
out an operation to reverse scene and culprit. This is
aimed
at producing a fabricated justification for the crimes
committed during the NATO aggression against my
country and
my people.
"Indeed, this 'indictment' itself constitutes one of
the
proofs that what I affirm is true. Because all the
so-called
misdeeds supposedly committed by the armed forces of
Yugoslavia, which I had the honor to command, are,
according
to the 'indictment,' supposed to have occurred during
precisely the time of the NATO aggression against my
country.
"The intention is obviously to portray those who
defended
their families, children, thresholds, homes and
homeland as
villains, criminals, evil people. Whereas those who
traveled
thousands of kilometers to destroy those homes in the
night,
to kill innocent people, to destroy maternity wards,
hospitals, bridges, railways, trains, who collaborated
with
the Albanian terrorists-that those people, responsible
for a
huge number of victims and enormous material damage,
are
good, are correct, and should have the support of
international public opinion.
"To compound this absurdity..."
At this point the court interrupted Milosevic, turning
off
his microphone. Judge May insisted that Milosevic
limit his
comments to trial procedure. In the coverage of the
trial,
however, the big-business media applied their own
twist to
the news, dredging up all the old political charges
against
the Yugoslav leader and the Serbian people.
Milosevic tried to continue. "I want to confirm that
you
have not offered a single argument in response to the
very
clear legal facts I have presented regarding the
illegality
of this 'court,' established by a resolution of a
Security
Council that has no legislative nor judiciary power
and that
could hardly transfer prerogatives it does not have,
since
as lawyers you very well know that a right which one
does
not posses cannot be transferred.
"In any case...." Here the court again turned off his
microphone and Judge May demanded the former president
censor his comments.

President Milosevic tried once more: "Well, if you're
going
to limit the questions I can raise, then regarding the
procedure I would say the following: according to the
natural definition, which applies to any court, it
must be
neutral and impartial. And look at this 'court': the
indictment is based on allegations provided by the
English
intelligence service; the judge is English; the
prosecutor
is English; the Amicus Curiae is English; and I ..."
Here the court again cut off his microphone and
adjourned
the hearing.
=============================================

BACK IN YUGOSLAVIA, LAYOFFS AND STRIKES

Back in Yugoslavia, living conditions for the working
class
and for most of the population have continued to
worsen
since the U.S.-manipulated September 2000 election and
the
October 2000 coup that followed pushed Milosevic's
Socialist
Party of Serbia out of office.
Anyone who believed that the new Yugoslav government
would
receive more aid and economic help from the
imperialist
powers if it arrested Milosevic and turned him over to
NATO
has by now been sorely disillusioned. Even the puppet
Serbian Premier Zoran Djindjic has complained publicly
that
the Western leaders have reneged on their promises of
aid.
Unemployment is now up above 50 percent. In the first
week
of January, the announcement that four big Yugoslav
banks
would close threatened 8,500 more workers with
layoffs. The
news that Beogradska Banka, Jugobanka, Investbanka and
Beobanka would close provoked workers' protests, with
more
than 1,000 employees locking themselves in the banks'
offices in Belgrade, Krusevac, Nis and Vranje.
Trade unions say that for every 1,000 employees laid
off,
another 5,000 jobs are in jeopardy.
The Yugoslav government forced the closure of the four
banking giants to mark the launch of broad, World
Bank-
sponsored changes to the country's financial sector
that
will allow deeper U.S. and West European penetration
of the
Yugoslav economy.
(Copyright Workers World Service)
==============================================

============================================================

--
berlin.de - meine stadt im netz. Jetzt eigene eMail-adresse
@... sichern!
http://www.berlin.de/home/MeineStadt/Anmeldung

: Objavljeno 30 januar 2002

?Nezavisimaja gazeta?, Moskva, 26.01.2002.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns
= "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Larisa Kritskaja, Svetlana Ccernjak

REMZI KLARK: ?POSSTOVATI ZAKONE PRAVOSUDJA?

Bivssi drzzavni tuzzilac SAD odbacuje
americcku politiku sile

Dobiti intervju od Remzija Klarka nije nissta
laksse nego od predsednika: svaki minut njegovog
vremena je rasporedjen. I to za dan, nedelju, mesec, godinu
dana unapred. Plus nepredvidjeni dogadjaji i
okolnosti. Rodio se u Dalasu 1927. godine. Ratovao je u Koreji.
Potom - univerzitet u Teksasu, Ccikagu,
posao pravnika. Sa 34 godine je pomoccnik drzzavnog tuzzioca u
Kenedijevoj administraciji, sa 40 -
drzavni tuzilac u Dzonsonovoj administraciji. Dao je ostavku u
znak protesta protiv rata u Vijetnamu u koji
je otissao radi prikupljanja dokumenata o americckim
bombardovanjima i civilnim zzrtvama. Ono ssto je
tamo video toliko ga je potreslo da je od tada Klarkov zzivot -
neprekidan niz procesa, protesta i nastupa u
zasstitu prava. Remzi Klark je bio u Iraku, Jugoslaviji,
Palestini, Istoccnom Timoru, Nikaragvi, Panami, kod
ustanika u Kolumbiji. Tokom 70-ih godina je istupao s
optuzzbama protiv Pinocceovog rezzima u Ccileu.
Pokrenuo je organizaciju ?Medicina za Irak?. U Njujorku je
otvarao tribunal ?Anti-NATO? za istrazzivanje
zloccina vlade SAD i njenih saveznika protiv iracckog naroda.
Bio je u Jugoslaviji u dane bombardovanja -
dokumentujucci njihove posledice. Delegacija Medjunarodnog
akcionog centra koji je organizovao
dopremala je u Jugoslaviju lekove, bavila se prikupljanjem
ccinjenica i dokumenata koji su potom ussli u
knjigu ?NATO na Balkanu?. Kasnije, u danima izruccivanja
predsednika Jugoslavije Milossevicca
Hasskom tribunalu, Klark je istupao pred narodom na trgu u
Beogradu, pokussavajucci da omete
sklapanje posla izmedju SAD i nove vlade Jugoslavije. Remzi
Klark je sada pravni konsultant
Milossevicca.

- Ssta se dessavalo u Jugoslaviji tokom
bombardovanja, ssta vam se najvisse urezalo u seccanje.

- Ljudi su stajali na mostovima izazivajucci vatru
na sebe. Na hiljade ljudi su se okupljale na trgovima i
pevale: ?Bombardujte!.. Ako smete!?

Onda je Jugoslavija, dovedena do krajnje
iscrpljenosti, kapitulirala....

Optimista sam. Ali, saznavssi za izruccenje
predsednika Milossevicca Hasskom tribunalu, po prvi put
u ccitavom svom zzivotu osetio sam da gubim optimizam.
Medjutim, kada sam video desetine hiljada gnevnih
demonstranata sa zastavama, moj optimizam je vaskrsao i
pomislio sam: ?Ovi ljudi cce i to prevazicci!?

Kosstunica mi je rekao da cce ?jednom svakako
napisati knjigu o nezakonitosti Hasskog tribunala?.
Nisam ga odgovarao. Poccutavssi, dodao je: ?Mi pokussavamo da
prezzivimo... nekako?. - ?Da prezzivite?
Fiziolosski je to sasvim mogucce. Ali, valjda shvatate da nema
visse ni Jugoslavije ni Srbije?? - rekao sam.
?Slazzem se sa vama, - odgovorio je Kosstunica. - Za to je
potrebna... ccast?.

- Sad se vecc retko kad govori o Milosseviccu, o
Hasskom tribunalu. Onoliko dogadjaja: 11.
septembar, Avganistan, Pakistan i Indija... Ali, sudjenje u
Hagu cce se ipak odrzzati. Ono nije ni zamissljeno
kao jednokratna akcija. Zar ne?

- Vassington je taj tribunal formirao u jeku rata u
Jugoslaviji. To je postalo realna pretnja pravosudju.
Tada sam, 1992. godine, napisao protest koji je possto ga je
federalni sud odbacio, podnet Vrhovnom sudu
Sjedinjenih Drzzava na razmatranje. Protest je bio motivisan
krssenjem normi Ustava SAD o podeli vlasti:
zakon zabranjuje sudsko razmatranje predmeta koji se ticcu
politicckih razmimoilazzenja.

Vlada SAD je, stvarajucci tribunal u Hagu,
ignorisala ne samo sopstveni Ustav, vecc i Povelju
Organizacije Ujedinjenih Nacija. U njoj nigde neccete nacci ni
recci o dopustivosti formiranja bilo kakvog
?medjunarodnog kriviccnog suda? kao rezultat politicckog
konflikta ili, ssto je joss gore, kao rezultat rata.
Zato je tribunal u Hagu nezakonit. I pokussaj njegovog
poredjenja s Nirnbersskim procesom nad
nacisticckom Nemacckom nije nissta drugo do propaganda.

Statut Nirnbersskog tribunala donet je 25. oktobra
1945. godine, mesec dana pre stupanja na snagu
Povelje OUN. Zemlje koje su se ujedinjavale u Organizaciju
Ujedinjenih Nacija tada su postavile uslov: ?Statut
buducceg Tribunala postoji samostalno i necce biti ni u kakvoj
vezi s Poveljom Organizacije Ujedinjenih
Nacija?. Dakle, Nirnbersski vojni tribunal je delovao nezavisno
i bez moguccnosti pritiska politicckih sila
spolja na njegove odluke. To je prvo.

Drugo. Nirnbersski sud je predstavljao inicijativu
ccetiri nacije, dok je u formiranju tribunala u Hagu
uccestvovala jedna jedina zemlja - Sjedinjene Americcke
Drzzave.

Ccinjenica funkcionisanja Hasskog tribunala
stvorenog uz uccesscce OUN otvara joss vecce
moguccnosti za SAD u sprovodjenju bilo kog zakona sile, bez
obzira na bilo kakve medjunarodne norme
pravosudja. To su shvatali i Generalna skupsstina OUN i Savet
bezbednosti, ali niti su imali niti imaju kako
odvazznosti, tako i dovoljne nezavisnosti za to da ustanu
protiv toga.

Za SAD nema nicceg neobiccnog u unisstavanju
nepozzeljnih predsednika. Svet je dobio Mobutua
zato ssto smo ubili Lumumbu, i svet je dobio Pinoccea possto
smo ubili Aljendea. I tako dalje. Taj scenarijum
je svetu odavno poznat. Ali zato prodaje predsednika za novac
da bi se dobile namirnice - takvog presedana
u istoriji joss nije bilo.

Tokom rata je bilo nekoliko pokussaja da se
predsednik Jugoslavije ubije. Ne sumnjajte u to: liccno
sam video njegovu kuccu sravnjenu sa zemljom posle direktnog
pogotka ?pametne? bombe. Dve njegove
kancelarije unisstene su na isti naccin. Onda su pokussali da
iznajme ubicu obeccavssi 5 miliona dolara za
Milosseviccevu glavu. Nije im uspelo. Onda - sud u Hagu.

Dugi niz godina zloupotrebe sopstvene snage doveo
nas je do potpunog razaranja ccitavog sudskog
sistema. I sada moramo opet da se uccimo posstovanju zakona.
Zloccini SAD u ratu s Jugoslavijom su
dokumentovani tako da ima nade da cce se pojaviti pravi
medjunarodni organ pravosudja i da cce vlada
SAD biti pozvana na odgovornost i osudjena u skladu s
medjunarodnim zakonom. Unisstili smo Jugoslaviju
samo zato ssto je bila poslednje ostrvo socijalizma u Evropi.
Godinama smo bin Ladena snabdevali oruzzjem
i novcem - sve do pada Sovjetskog Saveza. Sada znamo ssta da se
radi s Dagestanom i ssest bivssih
sovjetskih republika u kojima zzive muslimani, u sluccaju
konflikta s Rusijom.

Ako smo postigli uspeh u Bosni, zassto nam ne bi
posslo za rukom i sa Cceccenijom? Strategija je
ista: muslimani protiv Slovena...

Danas nam govore o dva izvora pretnje bezbednosti
SAD. Prvi je ono ssto je preostalo od dva rata
(Drugog svetskog i hladnog): Kuba, Severna Koreja i - donedavno
- Jugoslavija. Drugi su ?islamski
fundamentalisti?. SSta su to ?fundamentalisti?, niko ne zna.

Sloveni su najbrojnija etniccka grupa u Evropi: ima
ih 300 miliona, dok muslimana na ccitavoj
zemaljskoj kugli nema visse od milijardu i po. Deo nasse
strategije je da se tako izvede da te ?pretnje nassoj
bezbednosti? medjusobno ratuju sve dok se medjusobno ne
istrebe. Tako sada na Kosovu svakodnevno
imamo napade muslimana na Srbe. Joss jedno, novo zzarisste rata
je Makedonija.

Izlaz iz tog bezumlja vidim samo u narodnom
jedinstvu, jer smo u suprotnom svi mi osudjeni na
?prezzivljavanje?. Verujem u narod. U svom jedinstvu to je
nesavladiva snaga.

Sada se odvija konsolidacija i naoruzzavanje
Evropske unije. (Otvoreno ccu recci da nissta ne mozze
biti gore od NATO-a!) Stvaranje evropske armije mozze barem
doprineti uspostavljanju kakve-takve
ravnotezze. NATO je pesnica americcke ekonomije. Evropske banke
i korporacije necce visse da se mire s
tim. Sada cce i one imati svoju pesnicu - nezavisnu evropsku
armiju. A tu vecc poccinje ?takmiccenje?.
Mozzda je to poccetak bezumlja, ali uzdam se u njihovo umecce u
postizanju kompromisa.

- Kad smo vecc kod bezumlja, mislite li da je
pretnja Iraku realna?

- Veliki je rizik udara na Irak. Kongres
Sjedinjenih Drzzava je vecc predsedniku na njegov zahtev
izglasao ovlassccenja za ssirenje vojne akcije protiv Iraka:
392 - ?za? i 12 - ?protiv?. Tako da rat s Irakom
postaje sasvim realan.

- 11. decembra 2001. godine ste povodom Iraka
uputili pismo ambasadorima i ministrima inostranih
poslova zemalja koje ulaze u sastav Sveta bezbednosti OUN. Da
li biste nassim ccitaocima izneli njegov
osnovni sadrzzaj?

- Hvala vam na tom pitanju. Ljudi u svetu moraju
znati ssta se dessava i ne smeju ccutati. Na Irak je od
17. januara do 28. februara 19991. godine, po priznanju
Pentagona, bacceno 88.500 tona bombi.
Bombardovani su objekti od zzivotne vazznosti: vodni
rezervoari, skladissta namirnica, industrijski kompleksi,
verski centri i prosvetne ustanove.

Irak je zbog ekonomskih sankcija izgubio preko 1,5
miliona svojih gradjana. Preko polovinu njih ccine
deca koja nisu dozzivela peti rodjendan. Te sankcije - koje je
Savet bezbednosti OUN bio prinudjen da
donese pod pritiskom vlade SAD - direktno su krssenje
konvencije ?O genocidu? jer vode svesnom
unisstavanju civilnog stanovnisstva Iraka.

Sve komisije koje su po mandatu OUN poseccivale
Irak u poslednjih deset godina svedoccile su o
neljudskim patnjama naroda. Najodvazzniji eksperti tih komisija
otvoreno su protestovali protiv politike
sankcija i inspekcija koju su Sjedinjene Drzzave nametnule
Iraku. Vlada SAD ccak i program ?Nafta za
hranu? koji su OUN donele tek krajem 1996. godine, posle
medjunarodnog protesta protiv unisstavanja
naroda putem ekonomskog gussenja, koristi za svoje politiccke
manipulacije.

Stav Sjedinjenih Drzzava ozbiljno je kompromitovao
organizaciju kao ssto je OUN. Savet bezbednosti
OUN je, premda i pod prinudom, uccestvovao u zloccinima SAD
protiv mira i ccoveccanstva. Premda i pod
prinudom, ali kriv je za genocid.

Sada SAD bombarduju Irak kad god im se prohte.
Pritom su prinudjene da putem neprekidne
propagande satanizuju kako Sadama Huseina, tako i ccitav
iraccki narod, koristecci za to sredstva javnog
informisanja potpuno zavisna od vlade SAD.

Americcka propaganda je propaganda rasizma,
propaganda mrzznje i lazzi. Jucce je to bila
antisrpska kampanja, danas je antimuslimanska i tako dalje.

Nabrojaccu zemlje u kojima je politika SAD posle
Drugog svetskog rata dovela do destabilizacije:
Koreja, Vijetnam, Kambo?a, Nikaragva, Dominikanska Republika,
Filipini, Liberija, Kuba, Gvatemala,
Granada, Palestina, Liban, Iran, Somalija, Sudan, Haiti,
Salvador, Honduras, Angola, Hrvatska, Jugoslavija,
Sijera Leone, Irak, Indonezija, Avganistan. Ko je sledecci?
Glasila razmatraju mogucce kandidature.
Medjutim, imamo li ijednu ccinjenicu koja dokazuje krivicu
Iraka za bilo kakav zloccin protiv ccoveccanstva
tokom ccitave poslednje decenije? Mozzemo li izneti issta ssto
bi iole bilo nalik na zloccine Sjedinjenih
Drzzava protiv te zemlje? Cilj americcke politike je
uspostavljanje kontrole i vladavine na Bliskom Istoku, u
Persijskom zalivu i Centralnoj Aziji.

Mislim da bi bilo izuzetno vazzno kada bi Rusija
protestovala. I to ne samo na diplomatskom nivou ili u
sstampi, nego putem Saveta bezbednosti i Generalne skupsstine
OUN. Rusija je jedina zemlja koja mozze
stati na put SAD koje danas igraju ulogu narkomana opijenog
sopstvenim ?uspesima?.

- Ssta mislite o predsedniku Rusije Vladimiru
Putinu?

- Nama je ovde u Americi neverovatno slozzeno da
analiziramo radnje ruskog predsednika i tim pre
da izvlaccimo bilo kakve zakljuccke: mi nemamo verodostojnih
informacija niti ih mozzemo imati.

- Zassto? Kako to objassnjavate?

- Mislim da je stvar u tome ssto Sjedinjene Drzzave
ne zzele da ccuju nissta pozitivno o vassoj zemlji.
Kod nas ccuju samo one u Rusiji koji i dalje insistiraju na
takozvanim ?reformama? usmerenim, kao ssto je
poznato, na nass sopstveni procvat i genocid ruskog naroda. Sve
ostale informacije se blokiraju, iako se
ccuvaju u sefovima za aktivno misleccu agenturu s visokim
ekonomskim obrazovanjem.

Medjutim, ono ssto sam u stanju da analiziram
svedocci o tome da u najvazznijim pitanjima
predsednik Putin deluje onako kako mora delovati snazzan lider
koji brani interese svoje zemlje i svog
naroda. U spoljnoj politici, u najbitnijem za SAD pitanju novog
americckog sistema PRO, on afirmisse
nezavisnost Rusije. To govori da Rusija i dalje stoji na
stanovisstvu zasstite mira na Zemlji.

Po mom missljenju, delovanje predsednika Putina u
medjunarodnoj politici je najbolji i jedini mogucci
izbor u okolnostima u koje je njegova zemlja dovedena. Ccini mi
se da mu i u unutrassnjoj politici, premda uz
velike potesskocce, uspeva da postepeno blokira vecc reklo bi
se nekontrolisanu pljaccku zemlje i zaustavi
osiromassenje ruskog naroda. On mora da u najtezzim okolnostima
donosi odluke i deluje. I u tim
okolnostima on se nedvosmisleno ponassa kao snazzan i pouzdan
lider.

On ima vrlo pametan stav po pitanju NATO-a,
proglassavajucci tu gangstersku massinu za ?saborca i
druga? Rusije i samim tim neutralissucci NATO makar za izvesno
vreme. Rusiji je potrebno vreme da se
digne na noge i orijentisse u onome ssto se dessava.

- A savez sa Sjedinjenim Drzzavama u ?novom ratu s
terorizmom?? Mislite da je i to pametna igra,
dobitak za Rusiju?

- Ne, ne mislim. Brine me stav predsednika Ruske
Federacije po tom pitanju, possto vidim da je tu
upao u postavljenu klopku: shvatanje i otklanjanje pravih
uzroka katastrofe koju Rusija dozzivljava odlazze se
zbog medjunacionalnih ratova unutar zemlje, a sada i van njenih
granica. To je izum rasisticcke zemlje kao
ssto su SAD a za zemlje sa vissenacionalnim stanovnisstvom, na
primer, Jugoslaviju i Rusiju. Jer, to je
zvaniccan stav Vassingtona: ?Neka se sami potamane?. ?Etniccka
ccissccenja? - tragedija Jugoslavije -
sada su se okrenula protiv njenog slovenskog stanovnisstva.
Sjedinjenim Drzzavama je posslo za rukom da
od Rusije otkinu ssest bivssih republika Sovjetskog Saveza sa
svim njihovim prirodnim bogatstvima. Ta
politika nacionalne mrzznje imala je za rezultat to da je pod
udar dospeo ogroman broj Rusa koji zzive na
teritoriji tih bivssih republika.

Ruska Federacija je sada saveznik SAD i zajedno s
njima cce ratovati ?protiv islama?. Medjutim,
saveznisstvo sa SAD predstavlja izuzetno veliku opasnost za
Rusku Federaciju. Ono mozze dovesti do
konfrontacije zzitelja Rusije s okolnim muslimanskim zemljama i
sa muslimanima koji zzive u samoj Rusiji. To
potvrdjuje ?ispravnost? politike Vassingtona (?neka se sami
potamane?) i pruzzicce neprocenjivu pomocc
SAD u njihovoj geopoliticckoj agresiji.

Zato mi se ccini da Rusija sada treba da ulozzi
neverovatne napore da bi povratila prijateljstvo i
poverenje muslimana.

- Ssta mislite, hocce li Rusija saccuvati
suverenitet i nezavisnost?

- Verujem da hocce. Mozzda bi bolje bilo recci:
nadam se... Bio sam mnogo puta u Rusiji. Ruski narod
poseduje veliku snagu. I njegova volja za nezavisnost nema
analoga u istoriji ccoveccanstva.

... Ovih dana sam bio na probi Kirovskog baleta u
karnegi-holu. Ruska muzika! Ruski muziccari!..
Koliku snagu ti ljudi imaju! Treba slussati rusku muziku da bi
se shvatilo koliko je taj narod velik. Jako volim
rusku muziku. Zato i govorim o snazi tog naroda...

Tessko da ljudi na Zapadu shvataju do kolike bede i
ponizzenja je taj narod doveden. To bi u nama
moralo izazvati uzzasavanje, a ne likovanje povodom ?uspeha?
nasse hajke protiv Rusije joss od poccetka
prosslog veka!

Ali, narod cce se dicci. Ja to posmatram s velikom
radossccu. Vidim prozrenje, zapazzam rastucce
kretanje u smeru stvaranja vecce federacije - to jest obnove
onoga ssto je tako neodgovorno bilo srusseno.
Zemlja postepeno prevazilazi stanje defetizma u kom je toliko
ranjiva.

Strani kapital, ekonomska agresija nijednoj zemlji
nisu doneli nissta osim postepenog i potpunog
osiromassenja, potpune zavisnosti od tog kapitala.

Smatram da cce period ekonomske recesije koji sada
u medjunarodnim razmerama napreduje,
nesumnjivo pomocci Rusiji da opet pronadje sebe. Zassto? Pa
zato ssto ekonomija Rusije ne zavisi od onih
vesstacckih ccinilaca na kojima se temelji ekonomija SAD ili
Japana, na primer. A obnova unisstene
ekonomije Rusije zalog je njenog preporoda u koji, kao ssto
rekoh, verujem. Ili - hoccu da se nadam...

- Kada su SAD bombardovale Srbiju ccesto se moglo
ccuti: ?Rusija je sledecca!? Da li je rat izmedju
SAD i Rusije mogucc?

- Mislim da nije. Ali, mogucce su stotine
takozvanih ?malih ratova? koji cce nas drzzati pod stalnom
pretnjom onog nuklearnog. Karakter rata se menja posle pojave
vazduhoplovne super-sile. Ubijanje iz
vazduha bespomoccnog stanovnisstva ili naoruzzanog protivnika
(koji je, ispostavlja se, u doticcnom sluccaju
isto toliko bespomoccan) - to je ono ?novo lice? rata kojim se
SAD danas toliko ponose. Niko se u
Sjedinjenim Drzzavama ne optereccuje brojanjem civilnog
stanovnisstva ubijenog u takvim bombardovanjima.
I armija SAD ratuje ?bez gubitaka?... To je sramota, ali se
zato ?isplati?!

Mislim da je svetu danas veoma potrebna jaka i
nezavisna Rusija, possto je ruski narod jedini u stanju
da zaustavi tu opijenost ubijanjem koja u SAD traje od trenutka
zavrssetka hladnog rata. Hladni rat nije bio
Vassingtonu smetnja za monstruozne zloccine protiv
ccoveccanstva, ali je snazzan Sovjetski Savez
spreccavao SAD od agresivnih ccinova krupnih razmera. A sada se
sve ?mozze?: smenjivati nepozzeljne
vlade, organizovati atentate na predsednike, mozze se
bombardovati sve ssto se krecce, mozze se
naoruzzavati Izrael da unisstava Palestince i optuzzivati
Arafat za ?terorizam?...

Rusija je jedina nacija sposobna da sprecci razvoj
genocidnog scenarijuma. Narod Kine nije u stanju
da odigra tu ulogu. Kineski narod je dospeo u drugu klopku -
takmiccenja za ekonomsku mocc. To - ako bude
srecce - vodi ka snu o super-sili. To cce, sa svoje strane,
nastaviti politiku Sjedinjenih Drzzava uperenu na
unisstavanje malih i bespomoccnih nacija a u cilju njihove
eksploatacije.

Zato liccno ja verujem (ili hoccu da se nadam) da
cce narod Rusije - zbog svog internacionalnog
naccina missljenja i istorijske prosslosti - nassavssi sebe,
uspeti da postane centar odvraccanja za SAD i to
cce se blagotvorno odraziti na stanje ccitavog sveta.

- Da dotaknemo temu globalizma i antiglobalista.

- Sigurno je da je u toku napad na globalizaciju.
Ljudi su pocceli da shvataju da je globalizacija
smrtonosna za njihove kulture. I oni ne zzele da sve ssto je
ccoveccanstvo milenijumima stvaralo zamene za
uliccna kolica s hamburgerima.

Nedavno sam ccuo od jednog komentatora koji je
branio ideju eksploatacije nafte na Aljasci:
?Nazivajucci taj proces ?istrazzivanje?, dajete mi na znanje da
ste njegov pristalica, a ako govorite o
?pravljenju naftnih bussotina? - jasno je da ste protiv?. Kako
da Sjedinjene Drzzave, kojima pripada 75 %
sredstava MMF i STO, drugaccije nazovu ekonomski napad na tudje
zemlje i narode koji joss nisu uspeli da
sasvim prekopaju i unakaze svoje zemlje bogate prirodnim
resursima? Stari termin ?kolonizacija? mozzda se
necce svideti, pogotovo onim narodima koji su vecc u nekoliko
navrata ?globalizovani? u cilju usavrssavanja
civilizacije. Globalizacija je eufemizam i nissta drugo. Morao
bi se dicci protest protiv lazzi koja stoji iza njega.
I - na zaprepassccenje umornog sveta - demonstracije protiv
globalizacije izvele su na ulice na hiljade
uglavnom mladih. Raduje me njihova masovna pojava: to govori o
zdravoj prirodi ccoveka.

Globalizacija nema nikakvu drugu motivaciju osim
profita. Danas, u uslovima pada ekonomskih
pokazatelja u SAD, rat, i to po moguccstvu veccih razmera,
postaje sve potrebniji poljuljanoj americckoj
ekonomiji. A za to se ne mozze smisliti nissta bolje od ?borbe
s terorizmom?. To je jedna strana medalje.

S druge strane, dok taj rat nije zavrssen, recesija
kocci globalizaciju. A da ne govorim o tome da cce
Sjedinjene Drzzave morati da terorissu ne samo spoljnog
neprijatelja, nego i sopstveno stanovnisstvo,
gradjane Amerike. Nedavno je ?Njujork-Tajms? objavio cclanak
pod naslovom ?Zemlji su potrebni zatvori?.
Ispostavlja se da nam nisu potrebne ni sskole, ni bolnice. Ali
cce zato broj zatvorenika premassiti sadassnji
broj od dva miliona... A sve to u situaciji kada kod nas pre
recesije 48 % gradjana nije imalo pristup
medicinskim uslugama, a odredjeni procenat svrssenih djaka
nassih sskola ne ume, kako se pokazalo, ni da
ccita ni da pisse.

Nass zadatak je da ljudima objasnimo ssta je to u
stvari globalizacija. To je odricanje od nacionalne
nezavisnosti. To je odricanje naroda od svojih milenijumima
formiranih kultura. To je uskraccivanje nassoj
deci moguccnosti da grade svoj zzivot na nivou ekonomske
dovoljnosti. I ako svet to joss nije shvatio na
primeru svih zemalja Latinske Amerike, Afrike, malih i velikih
ostrva Zapadne i Istoccne polulopte cciji narodi
ginu u borbi protiv stogodissnje globalizacije njihovih zemalja
i kultura; ako napad na slovensko stanovnisstvo
Balkana i na muslimanski narod Iraka, bombardovanje iraccke
dece i glad dece Avganistana u vama joss
uvek ne izazivaju zdravi gnev, onda i treba da nas zgaze zbog
nasse potpune gradjanske neodgovornosti. Ali,
ja sam optimista. I vidim da protiv globalizacije sve visse
protestuju zasstitnici ccovekove okoline, farmeri,
verski lideri, studenti, djaci, radniccki odbori, drusstvene
organizacije... To je ustanak.

- Verujete li da taj ustanak necce biti najsurovije
ugussen? ?Zemlji su potrebni zatvori?...

- Zasad ne mogu recci da je pokret protiv
globalizacije stekao snagu sposobnu da se odupre
surovosti apologeta globalizma. Ali sam uveren da je on vecc
izmakao kontroli i da cce se u povoljnom sticaju
okolnosti, kao ssto je kriza na trzzisstima, konsolidovati.

To join or help this struggle, visit:
http://www.sps.org.yu/ (official SPS website)
http://www.belgrade-forum.org/ (forum for the world of equals)
http://www.icdsm.org/ (the international committee to defend
Slobodan Milosevic)
http://www.jutarnje.co.yu/ ('morning news' the only Serbian
newspaper advocating liberation)

: Objavljeno 30 januar 2002

After it was made on November 6, the Decision of the Federal Constitutional
Court on unconstitutionality of the the Federal Government's Decree on
cooperation with the so-called tribunal in the Hague has finally been
published. Here is an unofficial English translation of it.

OFFICIAL GAZETTE OF FRY, No.70/01, December 28, 2001

DECISION

On the constitutionality and legality test of the Decree on the procedure
for cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal

I

The Federal Constitutional Court, pursuant to the provisions of Article 127,
par 2 of the Constitution of FRY and the provisions of Article 15, par 1 of
the Rules of Procedure of the Federal Constitutional Court (Official Gazette
of FRY, no.44/93 and 25/95), established that the Socialist Party of Serbia,
Belgrade and Patriotic Union of Yugoslavia, Belgrade challenged
constitutionality and legality of the Decree on the procedure for
cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal (Official Gazette of
FRY, no.30/0).

The Court also established that more than one joint or individual
initiatives contested the constitutionality and legality of the same Decree,
as follows: joint initiative of professors and assistant professors of the
Faculty of Law in Belgrade: 1) Dr. Ljubisa Lazarevic, full professor; 2) dr.
Kosta Cavoski, full professor; 3) Dragutin Coskic, full professor; dr.
Dragutin Orlic, full professor; 5) Dr. Budimir Kosutic, full professor;
Dr.Slobodan Markovic, full professor; 7) Dr. Slobodan Panov,
senior-lecturer;8)Balsa Kascelan, assistant probationer; 9)Dr. Ratko
Markovic, full professor; 10) Dr.Mirjana Stefanovski, associate professor;
11( Dr. Zagorka Jekic, full professor; 12)Dr. Djordje Lazic, associate
professor; 13) Branko M.Rakic, senior-lecturer; 14) Dr. Stevan Djordjevic,
full professor; 15) Dr. Jugoslav Stankovic, full professor; 16) Dr.Sasa
Bovan, senior lecturer; 17) Dr. Milena Polajac, senior-lecturer; Dr. Milosav
Milosevic, senior-lecturer; 19) Goran Ilic M.A., assistant professor;
Dr.Zika Bujuklic, senior-lecturer; 21)Dejan Djordjevic, assistant
probationer; Bojan Milisavljevic, assistant-probationer; 23) Dr. Vladimir
Stoiljkovic, senior-lecturer; 24) Dr.Oliver Antic, full professor; 25)
Dr.Obrad Stanojevic, full professor; 26) Gordana Pavicevic-Vukasinovic,
senior-lecturer; 27) Zlatija Djukic-Veljovic, full professor; 28) Vladan
Petrov, assistant-probationer; 29) Aleksandar Gajic, assistant probationer;
30) Dr.Vera Cuckovic, full professor; 31) Miodrag Jovanovic, M.A. assistant
professor; 32) Dr.Olivera Vucic, senior-lecturer; 33) Dr. Mirko Vasiljevic,
full professor; 34) Dr.Borivoje Cunderic, full professor; 35)Dr. Ranko Keca,
full professor; 36) Academician Vlajko Brajic, full professor 37) Marko
Djurdjevic, assistant; 38) Dr.Djordje Ignjatovic, full professor; 39) Zoran
Mirkovic, M.A. assistant;40) Dr.Vladan Joncic, seniro-lecturer;41) Dr.
Nebojsa Jovanovic, associate professor; 42) Dr.Milan Skulic,
senior-lecturer; 43) Natasa Delic, M.A. assistant; 44) Nenad Tesic,
assistant-probationer; 45) Dr. Vladimir Milic, full professor; 46)
Aleksandar Jaksic, senior-lecturer; 47) Dr.Miodrag Simic, full professor;
48) Dr.Zoran Stojanovic, full professor; 49) Dr. Snezana Petrovic, associate
professor; 50) Vuk Radovic, assistant-probationer; 51) Mr.Dragan Panic,
assistant; joint initiative of lawyers; 52) Toma Fila of Belgrade, 53)
Branimir Gugl of Belgrade; 54) Momcilo Bulatovic of Belgrade; 55) Zdenko
Tomanovic of Belgrade; Moma Raicevic of Belgrade; individual intitatives:
56) The Yugoslav Left, Belgrade; 57) Budimir Rudovic, Belgrade; 58) Jovan
Koprivica, lawyer of Belgrade; 59) Dragan Ivanovic, lawyer of Pozarevac;
Branko Nikolic, of Pozega; 61) Vladimir Teslic of Krusevac; 62) Cedomi Cosic
of Jasa Tomic;63) Municipal Committee of the Socialist Party in Priboj; 64)
Branko Miletic of Vrnjacka Banja; 65) Municipal Committee of the Yugoslav
Left in Pozarevac; 66) Commission of the Federal Parliament for Freedom
Realization; 67)The Municipal Committee of the Yugoslav Left in Kula; 68)
The Municipal Committee of the Socialist Party in Bela Palanka; 69) Ratomir
Vojvodic lawyer of Belgrade; 70) Dr.Vidak Krivokapic, of Belgrade; 71)
Prof.Dr.Vladimir Stambuk of Belgrade, 72) Council of the Leftist Youth in
Belgrade; 75) Ratomir Rojevic of Kosovska Mitrovic; 76)Ferid Hamovic of
Belgrade; 77) Milomir Markovic of Prokuplje; 78) Srdjan Smiljkovic, of
Belgrade; 79) Dusanka Milenkovic of Prokuplje; 80) Milija Peric, of Blace;
81) Mileta Sokovic of Pljevlja, 82) Zivojin Stanic of Kragujevac; 83)Dusan
Unkovic of Belgrade; 84) Ljubisa Ristic,of Belgrade; 85) Vladimir Dujic of
Belgrade; 86) Mesud Axemovic of Belgrade; 87) Committee of University Left
in Belgrade; 88) Dr. Ljubomir Grujic of France and 89) Municipal Committee
of the Yugoslav Left in Knin.

The Court ruled, pursuant to Article 14 of the Rules of Procedure of the
Constitutional Court, to join the proceedings on the initiatives and
applications of the authorized applicants into single process and one
decision.

The applications lodging the initiative were submitted to the Federal
Government, in keeping with the provisions of Article 26, par 1 of the Law
on the Federal Constitutional Court, asking for reply. The Federal
Government, acting through the Federal Ministry of Justice, replied to the
Federal Constitutional Court.

By virtue of Article 132 of the Constitution of FRY, the Federal
Constitutional Court issued the Decision IV U no.103/01 through 129/01
suspending the enforcement of the Order of the Federal Ministry of Justice
on extradition of indicted individuals issued further to the Decree on the
procedure fo cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal,
no.2/1-121/8-01-06 dated 25 June 2001 and actions by other state authorities
taken in enforcement of that Order, on 28 June, 2001.

II

1. The submitted initiatives suggest that the contested Decree is not in
conformity with the Constitution of FRY and the Law on Criminal Proceedings
in formal and material terms. In formal terms because the Federal Government
overstepped its constitutional powers, by passing the contested Decree, as
stipulated in Article 99 par 1 item 4) of the Constitution of FRY,
stipulating, inter alia, also the possibility of transfer at the request of
the International Criminal Tribunal the criminal prosecution of an
individual who is subjected to criminal proceedings in the competent court
in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia or adjudicated under the final court
decision; possibility of extradition of individuals located in the territory
of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia irrespective of being foreigners or
nationals; having attempted to regulate the issues of the procedure for
protection of law in courts and other state authorities it has taken the
legislative prerogatives determined in the Constitution of FRY, because the
provision of Article 26, par 1 of the Constitution of FRY guarantees the
right to everyone to equitable protection of his/her rights in the legally
determined procedure, and not in the procedure established under a by-law;
that the contested Decree is not giving effect to the federal law but
changes as an incompetent authority, in a non-constitutional manner, via a
by-law, the Law on Criminal Proceedings, which expressly prohibits
extradition of the Yugoslav nationals, while allows it for foreigners only
in the cases specified under that Law; that the Decree, issued by
non-competent authority regulated the organization, competence and
composition of courts in the constituent Republic, although those issues, by
virtue of the provisions of Article 6 par 3 of the Constitution of FRY fall
within exclusive purview of the authorities of the constituent republic;
which under the contested Decree of the non-competent authority delegated
(surrendered) a part of national judicial and other state authorities to a
foreign court (gathering information from citizens; hearing of suspects, the
indicted, injured, witnesses and expert witnesses, including autopsy and
exhumation of corpses, gathering of material evidence; inspection and
prescription of identity papers including those compiled or gathered by the
Yugoslav judicial and other state authorities on violations of the
international humanitarian law);that the entire competence of national
courts and other state authorities to conduct court proceedings in certain
criminal offenses stipulated by law are assigned to a foreign court, which
violates the principle of territorial jurisdiction of the Yugoslav judicial
and other state authorities, in view of the fact that delegation of court
competence from the national to foreign or a court outside the country fall
within the purview of the federal legislator. In material terms, according
to the allegations provided the contested Decree is not in compliance with
the Constitution of FRY and the Law on criminal proceedings, because: is
enables extradition of the Yugoslav citizens to another state, although
under the provisions of Article 17, par 3 of the Constitution of FRY is
prohibited; because the Decree enables extradition of foreigners to another
state, despite the provisions of Article 66 par 2 of the Constitution of FRY
stipulates that a foreigner may be extradited to another state only in cases
anticipated under the international treaties which bind FRY and which were
ratified and published in compliance with the Constitution of FRY, Articles
16 and 66 ); because by virtue of Article 28 of the Constitution of FRY no
one may be adjudicated or sentenced again for an offense if the process
against him was finally suspended, or the indictment act against him was
finally rejected, or if he/she was acquitted under the final ruling or
sentenced, while the contested Decree stipulated the possibility of
assigning the proceedings to the International Criminal Tribunal and
surrender of the person charged although the proceedings against him was
finalized in the national court under the final court ruling; because the
contested Decree enables the initiation of process actions undertaken by the
investigation authorities and the Prosecutor of the International Criminal
Tribunal, and against which no legal remedy is allowed, or submission to any
other court in violation of the provisions of Article 67, par 4 of the
Constitution of FRY, which stipulates that the freedoms and rights
recognized and guaranteed by the Constitution of FRY enjoy court protection
in a national court, and also the protection of the right to personal
freedom, not to be denied to anyone except in cases and under the procedure
set out in the Federal law (Article 25, par 1 and 2 of the Constitution of
FRY);because that Decree relates to foreigners and Yugoslav citizens, hence,
accordingly to their extradition to the International Criminal Tribunal,
despite the provision of Article 17 par 3 of the Constitution of FRY, which
prohibits the extradition of the Yugoslav citizens to another state, namely
to a foreign court, namely the court seated in another state, beyond the
jurisdiction of FR Yugoslavia, since the prohibition covers any foreign
court, whether established by one or more countries; because the Law on
Criminal Proceedings prohibits surrender of the accused or sentenced
persons - Yugoslav citizens- to a foreign country; because the stated
constitutional and legal prohibition of extradition of the Yugoslav citizens
could be changed only via amendments to the Constitution of FRY and the Law
on Criminal Proceedings, in the proceedings prescribed under the
Constitution of FRY rather than by a by-law as was the case with the
contested Decree; that the legal merit for approval of the contested Decree
is unconstitutional; that the same does not contain preamble on the legal
merit, but the provisions of its Article 1 prescribes that it should govern
the procedure of cooperation of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia with the
International Criminal Tribunal in honoring the "obligations of the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia under the UN SC Resolution 827(1993) and the Statute
of the International Criminal Tribunal`; that the mentioned Resolution,
establishing the International Criminal Tribunal or the Statute of that
Court are no integral part of the internal legal system, because by virtue
of the provision in Article 16, par 2 of the Constitution of FRY the
integral part of the internal legal system shall be only the international
treaties ratified and published in keeping with the Constitution and
generally accepted rules of international law; that the above stated
Resolution of the Security Council and the Statute of the Tribunal, which is
an integral part thereof, can be no legal basis for the approval of the
contested Decree; that the Federal Government, by virtue of the Constitution
of FRY, may enact decrees, decisions and other instruments only in giving
effect to the federal laws and other regulations and general enactment
provided it is empowered under these acts to do so, while the Law on
Criminal Proceedings did not specify such powers.

2. The reply received from the Federal Government, through the Federal
Ministry of Justice stated that; according to Article 16 of the Constitution
of FRY, the international treaties which were confirmed and published in
keeping with the Constitution and generally accepted rules of international
law are the integral part of the internal law, while the provisions of
Article 124 par 1, item 2 of the Constitution of FRY implies that the
international treaties are, in terms of legal strength above the federal
laws; that on the merit of the above stated and the fact that FRY is member
of the United Nations and signatory to the UN Charter, it follows that FRY
is bound to cooperate in full with the International Criminal Tribunal,
established by the Security Council based on the authorities set in the UN
Charter, independent of the provisions of the national laws: that the
Security Council in its Resolution 827 (1993) approved the Statute if the
Tribunal and decided to establish it under the official name of "The
International Tribunal for prosecution of the responsible individuals for
grave violations of the international humanitarian law in former Yugoslavia
between 1 January 1991 and the date to be established by the Security
Council after peace shall have been reestablished"; that, despite the fact
that no establishment of an ad hoc international criminal tribunal has been
expressly stipulated in the UN Charter, it could be taken as an acceptable
measure, under Articles 24, 25 and 29 and Chapter VII, (specifically under
Articles 39, 40 and 41) of the UN Charter relating to the powers of the
Security Council; that under Article 29 of the Charter the Security Council
may establish ancillary bodies in pursuance of its tasks, while the
mentioned Article 39 of the Charter authorizes the Security Council to
determine threat of peace, violation of peace or aggression and issue
recommendations or decide which measures to take to establish international
peace and security; that based on Article 25 of the Charter member states
have agreed to accept and implement the decisions of the Security Council in
compliance with the Charter, as well as that all the resolutions adopted
further to Chapter VII of the Charter are binding on all the UN members;
that the Security Council, on the occasion of armed conflicts in the
territory of former SFRY, exhausted all interim measures under Article 40
of the Charter; that the approval of the Resolution 827 on the establishment
of the International Criminal Tribunal of 25 May 1993, unanimously accepted
the report of the UN Secretary General and the Statute of the Tribunal,
while at the later UN General Assembly sessions there were no objections to
the mentioned instruments of the Security Council; that the argument that
"the activity of the International Criminal Tribunal amounted to the
interference in the internal affairs of a state`, neglects the provisions of
Article 2, point 7 of the Charter, which provided that the prohibition of
interference is not applicable in case of coercion measure taken under
Chapter VII of the Charter, under which the International Criminal Tribunal
was established; that the remark that the Statute of the International
Criminal Tribunal is in collision with the provisions of the Constitution of
FRY, which prohibits the extradition of the Yugoslav citizens is groundless,
because the provision of Article 17, par 3 of the Constitution of FR of
Yugoslavia does not refer to the international court established by the
United Nations, whose member FR of Yugoslavia is; that the claim of the
initiator of the constitutional dispute cannot be accepted that in the
interpretation of the mentioned provision of the Constitution of FRY the
point of departure should not be linguistic but historical, namely the fact
that at the time of the enactment of the Constitution of FRY existed no
international criminal tribunal, since the International Criminal Tribunal
is not the first of the kind, but that its predecessors were military courts
in Nuremberg and Toki, established under the London treaty of 1945; finally
that in 1998 in Rome, at the UN plenipotentiary conference, years old idea
on the establishment of the International Criminal Tribunal under the
auspices of UN was realized under the Rome Statute of the International
Criminal Tribunal, and that the Statute was ratified by Yugoslavia in June
2001; that under the provision of Article 89 of the Rome Statute the
obligation of the states signatories is to extradite own nationals to that
court; that Article 6 of the Convention the prevention and punishment of the
crime of genocide of 1948, ratified by Yugoslavia in 1950 it was set out
that "persons accused of the crime of genocide or any other crime under
Article 3 shall be transferred for trial to the competent courts of the
state on whose territory the relevant crime was perpetrated or to the
International Criminal Tribunal that will have jurisdiction over those
states parties, which shall recognize its jurisdiction`; that hence, it
cannot be said that the constitution maker was not aware of the possibility
and certainty of establishment of such a court, the more so as no
constitution is enacted for current requirements but for a longer time
frame; that apart from it, even if such an interpretation would be accepted
on the constitutional ban on extradition of nationals, the above mentioned
constitutional status of an international treaty in the legal system of FR
Yugoslavia it follows that the Statute and the Rules of the International
Criminal Tribunal, being part of the UN Charter, is part of the internal law
of FR of Yugoslavia, so that a part of obligations on account of legal
assistance (under Article 29 of the Statute) which involves the surrender
of the accused derogates so understood a constitutional ban on extradition
of own citizen; that the norm in the Article 29 of the Statute has the
strength "above the law" under Article 124 par 1 point 2 the of Constitution
of FRY, and since only the Constitution is supreme to any law, that norm
would be actually of equal rank to the Constitution, and would be like lex
posterior and lex specialis stronger than the earlier general
constitutional norm; that the remark about the International Criminal
Tribunal being "political court" is groundless, since it was established by
the international community to put on trial any person who in the period
from 1 January 1991 until reestablishment of peace perpetrated crime that
may be qualified as a grave violation of the international humanitarian law
and irrespective of the citizenship held; that the provisions of the
Statute in material terms are in full compliance with the fundamental
principle of criminal law, namely the principle of legality "nullum crimen,
nulla poena sine lege"; that the material requirements of punishment were
known before the onset of the court activities, namely at the time of
perpetration of the alleged crimes and the same are contained in the
international law, to the effect that the crimes were set out both in the
international conventions and in the internal law of the states
participating in the conflict; that it the remark is groundless that the
persons put on trial by the International Criminal Tribunal will be in an
unequal position vis a vis persons tried by the national courts, in view
of the fact that according to the Statute of the Court the maximum prison
term is life long imprisonment, while in the Yugoslav legislation for
offenses under the federal law the prison term is twenty years, since
Article 101 of the Statute of the Court it was stipulated that in weighing
the sentence the usual practice inter alia shall be taken into account in
pronouncing the prison term in courts of former Yugoslavia; that, apart from
it, with the establishment of the International Criminal Tribunal the
national sovereignty was not completely cancelled because the international
community primarily expects from the successor states of ex-SFRY to
demonstrate their respective political and legal maturity, and institute, in
fair and impartial manner in their national courts proceedings against all
the individuals who violated the rules of the international humanitarian
law, irrespective of nationality, political status and the similar, and only
if those states shall have failed to proceed, the jurisdiction of the
International Criminal Tribunal shall be activated; that the supremacy of
jurisdiction of the International Criminal Tribunal shall be effectuated in
exceptional cases, namely that the national courts cannot re-try the cases
in which the International Criminal Tribunal adjudicated (the principle non
bis in idem), as well as that the International Criminal Tribunal is
entitled to renew the proceedings in an adjudicated matter in the national
courts, if the accused was sentenced for an ordinary offense but not the
crime against the international law or if the proceedings instituted in the
national court was non-objective and partial as to protect the accused from
the international criminal responsibility(Article 10 of the Statute which
does not accept the principle res indicata): that, on the merit of the
above, and particularly because UN Charter, Statute and Rules of the
International Criminal Tribunal approved in keeping with the Charter, are
integral parts of the internal law and that they have priority over the
federal law, it follows that the cooperation of FR Yugoslavia with the
International Criminal Tribunal is her obligation and that it may proceed
directly, under the Statute and the Rules of the Tribunal, only; that the
substance of the disputed Decree was to detail the forms of such cooperation
only, to facilitate it and eliminate possible ambiguities, and that it only
effectuates the implementation of the mentioned international instrument and
our legal system. Due to the above stated reasons the objection is
groundless that the Statute of the Tribunal conflicts other international
instruments acceded to by Yugoslavia, because under Article 103 of the UN
Charter, in case of conflict between the obligations of a UN member state
under the Charter and their obligations under another international treaty,
their obligations under UN Charter shall prevail.

3. The Federal Constitutional Court, further to Article 58 par 3 of the Law
on the Federal Constitutional Court, held a public debate with the parties
in the proceedings and some scholars.

The parties in the process have explained the details of the allegations,
provided in the Annex, their initiatives and replies received, while
Dr.Milorad Perovic, professor at the Faculty of Law in Podgorica, in his
written opinion stated that the contested Decree is untenable since it
violates the Constitution of FRY in formal and substantive terms. According
to him, the Decree is impossible to implement, because it stipulated the
cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal under the Rules of the
Statute of the Tribunal, but also in compliance with the Constitution of FR
Yugoslavia and its relevant law (Law on the Criminal Proceedings). Those
rules are, however, mutually exclusive.

III

1. The Federal Government regulated in the contested Decree the procedure
for cooperation of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia with the International
Criminal Tribunal in criminal prosecution of individuals responsible for
grave crimes against the international humanitarian law perpetrated in the
territory of ex-Yugoslavia since 1991(hereinafter: the International
Criminal Tribunal) and performance of obligations of FRY stemming from the
Security Council Resolution 827(1993) and the Statute of the International
Criminal Tribunal.

The Decree covered, inter alia: transfer of criminal proceedings held in the
national courts to the International Criminal Tribunal if so requested;
proceedings and jurisdiction of courts and other authorities for decision
making in such matters (Article 12 ad 13): the proceedings in national
courts after the transfer of the proceedings to the International Criminal
Tribunal (Article 14): the possibility of extradition of all the accused
(foreigners and Yugoslav citizens) to the jurisdiction of the International
Criminal Tribunal and its investigation bodies to undertake activities in
the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia(Articles 9 and 10); legal assistance to
the International Criminal Tribunal, including granting of transit of the
Yugoslav citizens through the territory if the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia( Articles 18 and 19) and others. The Decree contains references
to the application of the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal and
its Rules of Procedure and Evidence, to be applied by judicial and other
authorities in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Articles l, 2, 6, 12 and
17).

2. The provisions of Constitution of FRY provided for the following: power
in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is organized along the principle of
division of legislative, executive and judicial power (Article 12); the
executive and judicial power are bound by the laws, which are in compliance

: Objavljeno 30 januar 2002

A resolution of the Assembly and a process in its Committee on Legal
Affairs and Human Rights have been initiated in the last
week session by a group of CPRF deputies, joined by their
colleagues of the Left from other six countries.

Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of
Europe<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns =

"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Violations of Law in the Case of
Slobodan Milosevic

24 January 2002

Motion for the resolution

presented by Mr. Zyuganov and others

1. The Assembly notes that new facts have emerged concerning
the involvement of Osama bin Laden, leader of the Al
Qaeda terrorist organisation, in supporting the so-called
Kosovo Liberation Army. This evidence proves the KLA was part
of the international terrorist network. This in turn makes it
possible to assess the nature of the conflict in Kosovo in
1998-1999 differently, proving that the aim of the Yugoslav
leadership was not to suppress a liberation movement but to fight
armed separatism and international terrorism.

2. Slobodan Milosevic was arrested on 31 March 2001. But an
investigation by the Yugoslav authorities, which lasted three
months, resulted only in an accusation of "abuse of position."

3. The transfer of Mr. Milosevic from Belgrade to The Hague in
June 2001 at the demand of the International Criminal
Tribunal for Yugoslavia (ICTY) was carried out in gross
violation of the Yugoslav Constitution. This was confirmed by the
Yugoslav Constitutional Court decision of 6 November 2001. Thus
the unlawful transfer of Mr. Milosevic to The Hague may
be considered kidnapping.

4. As a result of the kidnapping of Mr. Milosevic, the Yugoslav
State was denied the right to a court examination of the
accusations leveled against the former head of state, while Mr.
Milosevic was deprived of the right to defend himself against
those accusations.

5. The ICTY was created by a decision of the UN Security
Council. However the UN Charter does not permit the UNSC
to create judicial bodies. Thus the legitimacy of the ICTY is
highly questionable.

6. A group of independent lawyers has submitted a complaint to
the European Court for Human Rights in connection with the
flagrant violations of law in the ?Milosevic case?. However the
ICTY authorities prevent free and unmonitored
communication between Mr. Milosevic and his lawyers. This
violates the generally recognised norms of human rights.

7. During Mr. Milosevic?s detention in Holland his rights have
been notably violated by the 24 hour a day illumination of his
cell and by monitoring him 24 hours a day, using video and
infrared equipment.

8. The Assembly calls on the Dutch and Yugoslav authorities as
well as the ICTY to work for the return of Mr. Milosevic to
Yugoslavia. That would help end the violation of law caused by
his transfer to Holland. It would enable Yugoslavia to
exercise its right for a court trial of Mr. Milosevic and it
would allow Mr. Milosevic to exercise his right to defend himself.

Until then the Assembly calls on the ICTY to ensure that the
conditions of Mr. Milosevic's detention in the UN Detention
Center conform to the generally accepted norms of human rights.

Signed

Christodoulides Doris (Cyprus), Carvalho Lino (Portugal),
Churkin Guennady, Gamzatova Hapisat, Gostev Ruslan,
Melnikov Ivan, Zyuganov Gennady, Shaklein Nickolay, Bakulin
Vladimir (Russia), Marmazov Yevhen, Oliynyk Boris,
Pakhansky Anatoly (Ukraine), Kanelli Liana (Greece), Neguta
Andrei (Moldova), Manukyan Yuri (Armenia)

Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights

Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe

24 January 2002

On Violations of Law

in the Case of Slobodan Milosevic

Dear Colleagues,

Recently new facts have emerged concerning the involvement of
Osama bin Laden, leader of the Al Qaeda terrorist
organisation, in supporting the so-called Kosovo Liberation
Army. This evidence proves the KLA was part of the
international terrorist network. This in turn makes it possible
to assess the nature of the conflict in Kosovo in 1998-1999
differently, proving that the aim of the Yugoslav leadership
was not to suppress a liberation movement but to fight armed
separatism and international terrorism.

It is necessary to note that former FRY President Slobodan
Milosevic was arrested on 31 March 2001. But an investigation
by the Yugoslav authorities, which lasted three months,
resulted only in an accusation of "abuse of position."

Later in June 2001 Mr. Milosevic was transferred from Belgrade
to The Hague at the demand of the International Criminal
Tribunal for Yugoslavia (ICTY). But it was carried out in gross
violation of the Yugoslav Constitution. This was confirmed by
the Yugoslav Constitutional Court decision of 6 November 2001.
Thus the unlawful transfer of Mr. Milosevic to The Hague
may be considered kidnapping.

As a result of the kidnapping of Mr. Milosevic, the Yugoslav
State was denied the right to a court examination of the
accusations leveled against the former head of state, while Mr.
Milosevic was deprived of the right to defend himself against
those accusations. Furthermore many leading experts on the
international law believe that the ICTY created by a decision of
the UN Security Council is illegitimate, as the UN Charter does
not permit the UNSC to create judicial bodies.

A group of independent lawyers has submitted a complaint to the
European Court for Human Rights in connection with the
flagrant violations of law in the ?Milosevic case?. However the
ICTY authorities prevent free and unmonitored
communication between Mr. Milosevic and his lawyers. This
violates the generally recognised norms of human rights. During
Mr. Milosevic?s detention in Holland his rights have been
notably violated by the 24 hour a day illumination of his cell and by
monitoring him 24 hours a day, using video and infrared
equipment.

We are calling on the PACE Committee on Legal Affairs and Human
Rights to investigate the mentioned violations on
international and national law in the "Milosevic case" and
facilitate the return of Mr. Milosevic to Yugoslavia. That would help
end the violation of law caused by his transfer to Holland. It
would enable Yugoslavia to exercise its right for a court trial of
Mr. Milosevic and it would allow Mr. Milosevic to exercise his
right to defend himself.

Signed

Christodoulides Doris (Cyprus), Carvalho Lino (Portugal),
Churkin Guennady, Gamzatova Hapisat, Gostev Ruslan,
Melnikov Ivan, Zyuganov Gennady, Shaklein Nickolay, Bakulin
Vladimir (Russia), Marmazov Yevhen, Oliynyk Boris,
Pakhansky Anatoly (Ukraine), Kanelli Liana (Greece), Neguta
Andrei (Moldova), Manukyan Yuri (Armenia)

To join or help this struggle, visit:
http://www.sps.org.yu/ (official SPS website)
http://www.belgrade-forum.org/ (forum for the world of equals)
http://www.icdsm.org/ (the international committee to defend
Slobodan Milosevic)
http://www.jutarnje.co.yu/ ('morning news' the only Serbian
newspaper advocating liberation)

Informazione

1568 DECISION OF THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL COURT (2/3)

1569 (3/3) DECISION OF THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL COURT

1570 Visnjica broj 158

1571 Enron, Tudjman And NATO

1572 Part 1 - MILOSEVIC IN THE HAGUE JAN. 30, 2002

1573 Part 2 of 2 - MILOSEVIC IN THE HAGUE JAN. 30, 2002

1560 amsfeld newsletter 31.1.2002

1565 I D S, Feb. 1

1567 [WG: WG: [JUGOINFO] Newsletter FREE SLOBO ! - n° 8]

1552

1554

1556

Potkategorije

Jugoinfo

Voce jugoslava / Jugoslavenski glas

RSS Feed

Još novih članaka