On the police and mafia regime in Serbia
1. IMPORTANT LINKS to articles about the "state of emergency" in
Serbia and its implications.
Many authors agree about the anti-democratic and mafia character of
the ruling mafia coalition, independent from their very different
point of views.
2. MISCELLANEA
Agencies and short articles about the "state of emergency" and NATO/US
support.
3. United Nations Office Of The High Commissioner For Human Rights,
Serbia And Montenegro:
Confidential Memorandum To The Ministries Of Justice And The Interior
Of The Republic Of Serbia. Initial findings and recommendations
arising from the visit to detainees in Belgrade 14-15 April 2003
For a very good summary of the recent events in Serbia we advice to
read:
BHHRG: THE KIROV MURDER REVISITED?
Zoran Djindjic's assassination and Serbia's political elite
An analysis of the events surrounding the assassination of Serbia's
prime minister on 12th March 2003
http://www.oscewatch.org/CountryReport.asp?CountryID=20&ReportID=197
=== 1 ===
IMPORTANT LINKS to articles about the "state of emergency" in Serbia
and its implications.
Many authors agree about the anti-democratic and mafia character of
the ruling mafia coalition, independent from their very different
point of views.
=== * ===
THE ARGUMENT OF FORCE. SERBIA UNDER MARTIAL LAW
by Nebojsa Malic
Antiwar.com - March 27, 2003
http://www.antiwar.com/malic/m032703.html
<<...Djindjic's murder has been blamed on "remnants of the Milosevic
regime", both by the Serbian government and the Imperial press. It is
hard to say exactly who claimed it first, though the accusations
seemed to appear in American papers sooner than in official Serbian
statements....>>
WASHINGTON'S STOOGE:
DJINDJIC ASSASSINATION EXPOSES U.S. ROLE IN SERBIA
By Heather Cottin
Reprinted from the March 27, 2003 issue of Workers World newspaper
http://www.workers.org/ww/2003/djindjic0327.php
<<...Djindjic had the distinction of being one of the only nationally
known politicians in Serbia to support the U.S./NATO 78-day bombing
campaign of Yugoslavia that began exactly four years ago on March 24,
1999... The Serbian government is using Djindjic's assassination
as an excuse to institute political repression, directing their
attacks on the remaining supporters of Slobodan Milosevic...
Zoran Djindjic was the corrupt beneficiary of U.S. regime change
and instituted the economic reforms that destroyed Yugoslavian
society as surely as the NATO bombs destroyed its infrastructure...>>
RUSSIAN COMMUNIST PARTY AGAINST STATE OF EMERGENCY IN SERBIA
Press service of the Russian Communist Party
Pravda.RU: Politics. 2003-04-01
http://english.pravda.ru/politics/2003/04/01/45411.html
<<...Western countries, which allegedly take care of their democracy,
ignore the fact that civil freedoms in Serbia are imperiled greatly at
present moment. The People's Patriotic Union of Russia denounces the
use of the state of emergency in Serbia as a way to intimidate
political opponents of the present government...>>
A FALLING-OUT AMONG THIEVES?
John Laughland
"All News is Lies", Sanders Research Associates, April 7, 2003
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0304/S00233.htm
<<...The West has not been able to contain its enthusiasm for this
massive crackdown in Serbia. The Union of Serbia and Montenegro (as
Yugoslavia is now known) was admitted last week to Europe's main human
rights body, the Council of Europe - at the height of these purges and
mass arrests... while the all-powerful US ambassador in Belgrade,
William Montgomery, also stated that "the international community
supports the Serbian government's fight against organised crime". As
Montgomery added, again without a trace of irony, that a contract had
just been signed between US Steel, based in Pittburgh, and the Sartid
company to buy the steel works at Smederevo...>>
THE ZORAN DJINDJIC ASSASSINATION: "DEMOCRACY" AT WORK?
by TV Weber
http://www.serbianna.com/columns/weber/002.shtml
<<...After Tito's death, the image of the Serbs took another
unexpected transformation, to that of insane nationalists, responsible
for all the evils in the Balkans. But now, with Yugoslavia dissolved
and Milosevic on ice in the Hague, the press wants to view the Serbs
as a bunch of gangsters...>>
AN INNOCENT ABROAD: POWELL IN BELGRADE
by Srdja Trifkovic
ChroniclesExtra, April 10, 2003
http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/News/Trifkovic/NewsViews.htm
<<..The campaign against Kostunica indicates the real
government agenda: to eliminate political and media opposition in
advance of the lifting of the state of emergency, so that a snap
election-with a preordained result-can be called before the opposition
recovers and regroups...>>
BOLSHEVIKS IN BELGRADE. SERBIAN PURGES UNMASKED
by Nebojsa Malic
Antiwar.com - April 10, 2003
http://www.antiwar.com/malic/m041003.html
<<...And what a purge it is: judges, military and police officials,
lawyers, even some politicians, all have been targeted in the past
three weeks, and the hunt is about to get even bigger...>>
POST-YUGOSLAVIA AND THE EXCEPTIONAL STATE OF SERBIA-MONTENEGRO
Tamara Vukov Interviews Andrej Grubacic, April 22, 2003
http://www.zmag.org/content/print_article.cfm?itemID=3498§ionID=36
<<...A few days ago, the vice-president of the government announced
that we should not complain that there is no opposition. Now we are a
democracy, so opposition is no longer necessary - we are so
democratic, that no opposition needs to exist. This is so-called
"total democracy." A situation in which democracy, in its total
self-fulfillment, abolishes itself. They are so devoted to democracy
that they no longer need it... The NGOs and rent-a-dissidents are
supporting it, promising complete loyalty to the Serbian
government...>>
AFTER PROMISING "DEMOCRACY"
by John Catalinotto
http://www.workers.org/ww/2003/serbia0417.php
<<...A state of emergency continues. Some 7,000 people were arrested,
with 2,000 held in prison for investigation, say both European press
accounts and dispatches direct from Belgrade. There can be no
criticism of the government, no demonstrations or strikes. Not even
public statements are allowed. The threat is now that parties will be
forbidden...>>
"SHOCK AND AWE" IN TURBULENT SERBIA
By David Binder, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR (WASHINGTON, May 16)
http://www.msnbc.com/news/911513.asp or
http://www.icdsm.org/more/shock.htm
<<...HOW ELSE TO characterize a 65-day state of emergency with 10,111
citizens questioned by the police, some 4,000 detained, 45 indicted
for "inciting terrorism and murder," the mysterious gunning down of
two prime suspects, sharp curbs on the independent press and
television, dismissal of judges and the imposition of draconian
laws?...>>
STATE OF EMERGENCY AS THE INTRODUCTION TO THE DICTATORSHIP
Spomenka Deretic, Belgrade, 10 May 2003
http://www.artel.co.yu/en/izbor/jugoslavija/2003-05-11.html
<<...Among more than ten thousand imprisoned citizens of Serbia are
also several newspapermen. The majority of them are released, but the
work is forbidden to the editors of the only two papers that were not
under the complete control of the current authorities in Serbia....>>
BHHRG: THE KIROV MURDER REVISITED?
Zoran Djindjic's assassination and Serbia's political elite
An analysis of the events surrounding the assassination of Serbia's
prime minister on 12th March 2003
http://www.oscewatch.org/CountryReport.asp?CountryID=20&ReportID=197
<<...It was puzzling that a cameraman had managed to be conveniently
situated outside the government building to record the moment Dr.
Djindjic was shot. There were no special events scheduled for the
12th March - the prime minister was only arriving for work as usual.
Even stranger, was the fact that the security cameras covering the
entrance and scene of the crime had been switched off...>>
=== 2 ===
MISCELLANEA
Agencies and short articles about the "state of emergency" and NATO/US
support.
=== * ===
Objective responsibility of the Serbian Government
http://www.dss.org.yu/nasstav.asp#1389
PRESS RELEASE BY THE DSS PRESIDENCY, 7.04.2003
OBJECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE SERBIAN GOVERNMENT
It is precisely because of its pronounced European orientation that
the Democratic Party of Serbia will use all means at its disposal so
that the truth about the seamy side of the state of emergency in
Serbia can reach the local and international public
At this evening's meeting chaired by Vojislav Kostunica, the DSS
Presidency discussed the situation in the country nearly a month after
the assassination of Serbian premier Zoran Djindjic and the
introduction of a state of emergency, and decided that the tardy
measures implemented by the Serbian government, clearly targeted
against organised crime though, do not have a comprehensive character.
The Democratic Party of Serbia has been a fervent advocate of an
all-inclusive and unselective struggle against all forms of organised
crime for years.
For this effort, the party, its president and his aides have been
attacked time and again and exposed to the genuine atmosphere of
lynch. This is particularly the case today.
The logical question is what the state of emergency is good for in the
hands of the Serbian government if it is quite clear that the
proclaimed purpose is not the only one. Aside from the uncontestable
results it has produced, the purpose of the state of emergency is to
keep the ruling coalition in power at all cost, relying on a doubtful
majority in the Serbian parliament, to help it shun responsibility for
the reforms it pledged but failed to carry out, for a wracked economy
and the sell-off of national companies, for growing unemployment rates
and flourishing commercial crime and corruption. There is also no need
to waste words on those who got rich recklessly under the former
regime and have now found secure livelihood with the new regime
composed of the remnants of the Democratic Opposition of Serbia.
After all, is there anyone else to blame for the fact that crime had
assumed the proportions that allowed for the murder of premier
Djindjic but the very same government? It is exactly the Serbian
cabinet that made it
possible for all sorts of crime to burgeon by denying that organised
crime existed at all. It is the Serbian government that has openly
sided with one criminal group clashed with another by preparing the
leader of one of them for the role of a protected witness. The very
fact that the Serbian government's State Security Council
coordinated the work of the Spec-Ops Unit since early January 2002
tells us that the responsibility for the assassination of premier
Djindjic lies with the government staff. The fact that the justice
minister plays an important role in the High Judicial Council points
to his objective responsibility for the appointment of Milan
Sarajlic as a deputy to the Serbian public prosecutor. The fact that a
Serbian deputy premier visited Dusan Spasojevic in jail and took him
out of it, and then was friends with him, also points to the objective
responsibility for links with an organised criminal group.
Serbia and Montenegro's membership of international organisations,
including the Council of Europe since not long ago, implies certain
rights and, even more so - obligations. Among other things, this
membership requires
that all the questions posed here be answered. It is precisely because
of its pronounced European orientation that the Democratic Party of
Serbia will use all means at its disposal so that the truth about the
seamy side of the state of emergency in Serbia can reach the local and
international public alike. We are not going to let the flag raised in
Strasbourg after two and a half years of hard work be tarnished by the
autocracy of the DOS core plainly intending to restore the one-party
system we once had in Serbia.
=
Information Service of the Democratic Party of Serbia
---
Evidence instead of fabrications
http://www.dss.org.yu/nasstav.asp#1417
PRESS RELEASE, 11.04.2003
EVIDENCE INSTEAD OF FABRICATIONS
This is virtually about an invented conspiracy in the
making, which followed the authentic one that led
to the murder of the premier, while the media are
just tipped off who is the next to be removed from
the political and public life
The Democratic Party of Serbia will cooperate
with all truly democratic forces and the civil
sector, fighting against blatant human rights
violations and threats to democratic institutions.
Likewise, it will not hesitate to internationalise
this problem, since the admission of Serbia and
Montenegro into the Council of Europe implies
both rights and obligations in this regard.
At today's briefing for editors-in-chief of
Serbian media, a government representative
informed the reporters about what allegedly was
the latest discovery in the investigation into the
assassination of premier Zoran Djindjic.
According to this "discovery", the blame for the
crime falls on a coalition of patriotic forces,
which, as they insinuate, has been led by the
Democratic Party of Serbia. Let alone that such
an allegation might imply that some parties in the
country are not patriotic.
Not for a moment contesting its genuinely
democratic and national orientation, the
Democratic Party of Serbia is openly pointing out
that it is now crystal clear that the state of
emergency, instead of allowing for an authentic
showdown with all forms of organised crime, has
been used for a showdown with the Serbian
strongest political party.
Everyone should be clear already that the
prisons have been closed and visits by family and
lawyers banned precesily to allow the
government's mouthpiece to seize the role of the
sole source of information about who purportedly
said what during the investigation. Accordingly,
the first thing to be done is to make up a
statement by a prisoner, and than develop it into a
concocted version that might serve as a basis for
the arrest of political rivals.
This is virtually about an invented
conspiracy in the making, which followed the
authentic one that led to the murder of the
premier, while the media are just tipped off who is
the next to be removed from the political and
public life. Isn't this undeniable evidence of a
political abuse of the state of emergency? Today,
Gradimir Nalic has been mentioned; tomorrow -
anyone can be mentioned and as falsely accused,
without the possibility of communicating at least
with lawyers. Moreover, extremely compromised
and blackmailed persons have been used as
supposedly reliable witnesses during the
investigation.
Information Service of the Democratic Party of Serbia
---
STATE OF EMERGENCY ENDS
BELGRADE, April 22 (Beta) - Acting Serbian President Natasa Micic on
April 22 lifted the state of emergency that was introduced on March
12, after the assassination of Serbian premier Zoran Djindjic.
Addressing the public, the acting Serbian president said that the
steps taken during the state of emergency had yielded results, since
"the perpetrators and organizers of Djindjic's assassination and many
other crimes have been found and will be brought to justice."
"We have dealt the final blow to organized crime. We have dismantled
Milosevic's [sic] criminal apparatus and stopped the spiral of
violence that has been tearing our country apart for over a decade.
The country has been preserved," Natasa Micic said.
She pointed out that the state institutions defended the country "with
full respect to international standards during the state of emergency.
She said that the authorities were now facing a reform of the
SerbianMontenegrin army, stressing that the army "used to be an
institution that managed to avoid public control for decades."
The acting Serbian president also said that Serbia should face the
fact that certain individuals had committed war crimes on its behalf.
"There will be elections and therefore a chance for campaigning and a
new distribution of political power, in accordance with the will of
the people. Until then, let us do what the people have clearly
demanded from us: finish the job we have started," Micic said.
COMMENTS ON DECISION TO LIFT STATE OF EMERGENCY
BELGRADE, April 22 (Beta) - OSCE CHAIRMAN: OSCE chairman Dutch Foreign
Minister Japp de Hoop Scheffer said in Belgrade on April 22 that the
OSCE would have applied pressure [sic] on the Serbian government had
it not chosen to lift the state of emergency. He said that there had
been no abuse during this period.
"Had the state of emergency continued, the OSCE would have applied
pressure to have it lifted," Scheffer said, after meeting with Serbia
and Montenegro President Svetozar Marovic, Serbian Premier Zoran
Zivkovic and Foreign Minister Goran Svilanovic.
Scheffer said that no country could exist in a prolonged state of
emergency. He said he hoped that everyone involved in the
assassination of Serbian premier Zoran Djindjic would be brought to
justice and that this could be accomplished in regular conditions.
PROSECUTOR AND PRESIDENT OF SERBIA'S SUPREME COURT ELECTED
BELGRADE, April 23 (Tanjug) - The Serbian Parliament Tuesday elected
Acting President of the Supreme Court of Serbia Sonja Brkic as
president of this court, while Acting Republican Public Prosecutor
Djordje Ostojic was elected as Public Prosecutor.
The Parliament released former Supreme Court president Leposava
Karamarkovic and former public prosecutor Sinisa Simic of their
duties at their own request [sic]. The newly elected President of the
Supreme Court and the Public Prosecutor took oath before the MPs.
SERBIAN LEGISLATION PASSES PUBLIC INFORMATION LAW
BELGRADE, April 22 (Beta)-The Serbian Legislature adopted on April 22
a law on public information, which regulates the numerous rights and
obligations of journalists, because it provides for the greater
protection of persons who are the subjects of information.
Several amendments were made to the government's proposal of the law,
including the provision under which information must be accessible to
all media under equal conditions.
Government representatives explained that the reason that the
provision on the free access to information was absent from the new
law is the fact that a special law on this is soon to be adopted.
One of the principal objections to the new public information law made
by Serbian experts and media representatives is the possibility of
banning the distribution of newspapers and magazines [sic], which was
rejected as unacceptable in the course of the public debate.
The possibility of banning the distribution of information was
included in order to prevent the propagation of war, incitement to
direct violence or the advocacy of racial, national or religious
hatred, as well as in cases when a published or broadcast information
might have direct "grave, irreparable consequences which cannot be
prevented in any other way."
---
LIGHT THROWN ON 28 MURDERS - MIHAJLOVIC
BELGRADE, April 29 (Tanjug) - Serbian Interior Minister Dusan
Mihajlovic said on Tuesday that during the Operation Sword, light had
been thrown on 28 murders, 23 attempts of murder, 45 exortitions, 15
kidnappings, 208 criminal acts of illegal production, keeping and
putting into traffic of drugs, and other criminal acts.
Mihajlovic told a press conference that as of March 12, 2003, the
police had filed 3,919 criminal charges against 3,400 persons, due to
sustained suspicion that they had committed 5,812 criminal acts.
He also said that 1,325 peaces of various weaponry had been taken
away, as well 357 hand granades, 110,097 pieces of various
ammunition, 74,830 kg.of different drugs and many other objects.
---
http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/
FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1051389842266&p=1012571727166
Financial Times May 8, 2003
Bush backs military support for Serbia
By Eric Jansson and James Politi
President George W. Bush yesterday authorised the US
to provide military assistance to Serbia and
Montenegro, offering Belgrade's new leader Zoran
Zivkovic, who recently replaced assassinated prime
minister Zoran Djindjic, one of the strongest
indications yet of international support for his
policies.
The White House said the decision followed
"significant steps" taken by Mr Zivkovic's government.
In the past week, officials from Serbia and Montenegro
agreed to place the military under civilian command,
ordered the police to arrest any individuals sought by
UN war crimes prosecutors, and sacked some
Milosevic-era generals.
The moves, according to Reuters, were described by US
officials as an important step in Serbia and
Montenegro's bid to join Nato's Partnership for Peace.
James Politi in Washington and Eric Jansson in Belgrade
---
http://www.b92.net/english/news/index.php?lang=english&version=
standard&my_categories_class=%27News%27&nav_category=
&nav_id=22668&order=priority&style=headlines
NATO offers help to achieve alliance standards
Beta, AP May 7, 2003
BRUSSELS -- Wednesday -- NATO today welcomed military
restructuring in Serbia-Montenegro and offered help
implementing more democratic changes, which would
enhance the country's bid to join the alliance.
After being presented with the programme for military
restructuring and civilian control by federal Defence
Minister Boris Tadic and army chief-of-staff Branko
Krga, NATO ambassadors expressed support for the state
union.
An anonymous NATO official told agency AP "the
minister made a very convincing presentation", adding
that the 19-nation alliance had offered to send a
group of expert reform advisors to Serbia-Montenegro.
He explained that the assassination of PM Djindjic had
prompted NATO ambassadors to hasten reforms in
Belgrade saying:
"The murder of Djindjic galvanized the emphasis on
reform. There is a sense of urgency that did not exist
before and we want to develop closer relations."
Tadic: membership within the year
Following the Brussels presentation, Tadic said that
he expects the new state union to join NATO?s
Partnership for Peace programme within the year.
Expressing hope that Serbia-Montenegro will accept
suggestions regarding full cooperation with The Hague
Tribunal and the International Court of Justice, Tadic
said that NATO Secretary General George Robertson and
the NATO Council had offered support to the
presentation outlining a concept of regional security.
The concept, presented by Tadic and Krga, calls for a
regional security policy for the Balkan Peninsula,
which will ensure there are no alliances between some
Balkan states against other Balkan states.
Strong support
Tadic also said that the armed forces civilian-control
reform plan had been well received and that
practically all ambassadors strongly supported the
Supreme Defence Council?s decision to transfer
military jurisdiction to the ministry of defence.
The defence minister confirmed the readiness of NATO
ambassadors to back Serbia-Montenegro's accession to
the programme, provided concrete steps are taken.
He added: "We will continue to cooperate with The
Hague tribunal and I am sure that we will meet all the
pre-conditions. I want to believe that we will become
a member of the partnership for Peace this year".
---
From: Mrs. Jela Jovanovic
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2003 6:00 PM
Subject: Scandals are shaking Serbian government
DAN-PODGORICA
Scandals are shaking Serbian government
- Assistant of the Health Minister falsified her diploma
- Minster Dusan Mihajlovic covered up the case of a double murder
Mrs. Aleksandra Makaj, assistant of the Minister of health in the
Government of Serbia is caught in forgery.
Mrs. Makaj is member of the Socialdemocratic party of Slobodan Orlic.
She was in the group of putschists that took the Socialdemocratic
party from Vuk Obradovic. Afterwards the Supreme court of Serbia
returned the Party to Vuk Obradovic, but the leader of the putschists,
Mr. Slobodan Orlic, with his mercenaries kept all the Assembly
representatives' mandates and functions.
Mrs. Aleksandra Makaj, presenting herself as the graduated student of
the Medicine faculty of the Zagreb University, became the assistant to
the Minister of health. Her domain is sanitary surveillance.
Through the checking at the Medicine Faculty in Zagreb, it was
ascertained that Mrs. Aleksandra Utopljenikov (her maiden name), born
of father Georgije and mother Anka in Virovitica 1952,Croatia, never
finished this Faculty. Minister's assistant is these days under the
surveillance of the Ministry of the interior affairs. She had, in
cooperation with her party colleagues, imported 20 thousand tons of
genetically modified crushed seeds. Serbia is in danger that EU
forbids the import of food from it.
In spite of the existence of the report that the assistant of the
Minister of health not only does not have the Diploma of the Medical
doctor, but not even the elementary education in the field of
medicine, the Government of Serbia refused to release her from the
duty. On the site of the Government of Serbia one can still read that
Mrs. Makaj is by profession doctor specialist. For fraud, as it seams.
Party colleague of Mrs. Makaj, representative in the Assembly and the
director of the Belgrade Fair, Mr. Branko Gligoric, seven month ago,
on the hill Goc killed by his vehicle two students of the Ministry of
interior
affairs, that were on the course for the multiethnic police in the
south of Serbia. He drove the car in the state of heavy alcohol
intoxication. Two youngsters passed away five days later in the
hospital. Minister Dusan
Mihajlovic covered up this case of double murder.
Milovan BRKIC
Wednesday, 21. May, 2003
=== 3 ===
Source: http://www.icdsm.org/more/shock.htm
or: http://www.ohchr.org/news/State%20of%20Emergency%
20%20UNHCHR-ODIHR-OSCE%20Memorandum%20on%20Detention%
20Facilities%2024%20April%202003.doc
United Nations Office Of The High Commissioner For Human Rights,
Serbia And Montenegro
Confidential Memorandum To The Ministries Of Justice And The Interior
Of The Republic Of Serbia
Initial findings and recommendations arising from the visit to
detainees in Belgrade 14-15 April 2003
CONFIDENTIAL
Following their joint visit to places of detention and detainees in
Belgrade on 14 and 15 April 2003 the UN
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, OSCE Mission to
Serbia and Montenegro and OSCE Office of
Democratic Institutions and Human Rights have identified nine urgent
recommendations which they would draw to
the attention of the authorities in the Republic of Serbia.
These recommendations are not intended to represent the complete
findings and recommendations of the three
institutions. Rather, they represent a number of urgent steps which,
if implemented, the Delegation considers
would immediately improve the situation of persons detained following
the imposition of the state of emergency.
The three institutions will issue a comprehensive joint report of
their findings and recommendations in due
course. This report will expand upon the recommendations below and be
complemented by additional ones. The three institutions would like to
draw the Government's attention to the fact that, in its observations,
many of the problems do not arise directly from the conditions under
the state of emergency, but are long-standing problems concerning the
Belgrade Central Prison which were identified during assessment visits
in 2001. The state of emergency has exacerbated most of these problems
and that certain provisions of the amended Law on the Suppression of
Organised crime are likely to continue doing so unless appropriate
safeguards are promptly introduced.
The three institutions welcome the lifting of the state of emergency
orders on 22 April. Although the provisions relating to detention
under the state of emergency are no longer in force, they consider
that the findings and recommendations pertaining to detention
contained in this memorandum remain relevant. They base this on
recognition of the fact that the pressures on Serbia's criminal
justice system remain; that provisions for extended detention without
judicial supervision remain in force under the amended Law on the
Suppression of
Organized Crime; and the continued existence of systemic problems
which have previously been identified
following the 2001 prison assessment, the visit of the Committee
against Torture in 2002 and other assessments.
Besides the matters requiring attention which are identified below,
the Delegation would like to record that
welcome improvements upon the situation in 2001 were noted. These
included improved relationships between
detainees and prison guards. The Delegation heard consistently
positive references to the guards from detainees
during their confidential interviews. In addition the Delegation also
noted that all government officials were
helpful and open in their discussions with it.
The three institutions hope that the initial findings and
recommendations contained in this memorandum will be
of assistance to the Government in its efforts to combat organized
crime and uphold the rule of law on
accordance with the relevant international standards. They look
forward to delivering the full report in the
near future and of having the opportunity to carry up follow-up visits
to places of detention.
Findings and Recommendations
Section A: The legal basis for detention
Finding 1: The continued justification for detention without judicial
supervision
Article 4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
(ICCPR) states clearly that derogations of rights guaranteed under the
Covenant must be strictly limited to those required by the exigencies
of the
situation. Both the procedures under the state of emergency and the
recent amendments to the Law on the
Suppression of Organized Crime include provisions for extended periods
of detention without adequate judicial
supervision. These are clearly not in conformity with the
international human rights standards, notably Article
9(4) of the ICCPR and Article 5(4) of the European Convention for the
Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR). The
commentaries and case law indicate that detainees may be held without
judicial supervision for a few days as an absolute maximum, even in
times of public emergency.
The Delegation found that the justification for the continued
detention of individuals without judicial
supervision was unclear in many cases, particularly as many
individuals had not been subject to any form of
questioning for many days and that much time has passed since the
initial emergency following the assassination.
Some, who had been in detention for several days, reported that they
had not been questioned at all.
With the ending of the state of emergency, which has occurred since
the visit, all derogations to the right to
be brought promptly before a judge are to be considered invalid and
therefore detention without charge is no
longer permissible. Therefore the detainees must be either charged
with a criminal offence or released in
accordance with Article 9 of the ICCPR.
The Delegation was particularly concerned that the combination of
detention without judicial supervision
combined with some of the other findings given below meant that human
rights violations were being compounded or exacerbated by a
combination of these factors.
Recommendation 1: Re-examine, on the basis of the facts of each case,
whether the conditions continue to warrant the detention of each
individual detained since the state of emergency was introduced
(including those detained under the amended Law on the Suppression of
Organized Crime). Ensure that detainees are either released or charged
with a criminal offence and kept in further detention only on the
basis of judicial decisions. These decisions should be subject to
regular review.
Finding 2: Information about status and rights for detainees; access
to counsel; procedures for considering
appeals
International standards as well as the principles established in the
Constitutional Charter of the State Union
and the Code of Criminal Procedure emphasize the rights right of
detainees to be informed of their status and
rights as well as being given access to legal counsel to protect their
interests. The state of emergency
suspended or restricted a number of rights relating to communication
with the outside world including visits by
families and communication with legal counsel. While some of these
restrictions may be justified as exceptions
required by the exigencies of the situation, applied on a case-by-case
basis and for short periods, they appear
instead to have been applied on a group basis or in an arbitrary way
and often for extended periods.
The Delegation found that many detainees were unclear about their
status and rights. There appeared to be no
systematic process to ensure that detainees were informed of their
right to challenge detention under the state
of emergency order. The confusion about their status, rights, and
possibilities for communication extended to
detainees who had passed to detention on judicial orders or on the
orders of the Special Prosecutor.
Recommendation 2: Carry out a systematic process of informing all
detainees of their status and rights. This
should include, inter alia, particular attention to those who were
initially detained under orders issued under
the state of emergency, but are now passing into other forms of
detention. Ensure that all detainees are given
immediate access to legal counsel.
Finding 3: Appeals procedures
At least one detainee was informed in writing that he had to submit
any appeal within 12 hours of receiving the
decision on his detention. No effective deadlines existed for ruling
on appeals; at least one detainee received
the negative decision around the 30th day of his 30-day detention. The
processes for communicating between
detainees and the authorities were not transparent in ensuring
adequate recording and issuing receipts for
communications. The Delegation also felt that a review by the Minister
of Internal Affairs was not a
sufficiently independent mechanism. The Delegation is concerned that
these problems persist for detainees held
under the provisions of the amended Law on the Suppression of
Organized Crime.
Recommendation 3: Introduce judicial supervision of all detainees
immediately. Introduce a clear and consistent
procedure regulating the process of allowing detainees to appeal
against detention, ensuring that there are no
temporal limits on the detainees' right to appeal and that all appeals
are ruled upon and communicated to the
individual concerned within 24 hours.
Finding 4: Arbitrary factors controlling conditions of detention
The Delegation found that the applicable rules governing detainees
conditions of detention were not clear and
that they depended in part on individual decisions by the prison
authorities. This was particularly problematic
as these decisions and the procedures applied appeared variously to
influence the detainees' possibilities to
obtain medical supplies or sanitary items and to communicate with
families and legal counsel.
Recommendation 4: Ensure that the law and regulations applied do not
introduce arbitrary factors which affect
the possibility of detainees to obtain access to counsel or restrict
other rights.
Section B: Conditions of detention
Finding 5: Police facilities unsuitable for extended detention
The Delegation found that the facilities in the police station it
visited were unsuitable for anything other
than short periods of detention and were not suitable for overnight
stays. The reasons for the unsuitability
included, inter alia, the lack of beds for each detainee and of any
blankets or mattresses; inadequate
provisions for food and medical care; and inadequate lighting and
ventilation. All these are requirements
contained in the Standard Minimum Rules of the Treatment of Prisoners
(SMR) and the European Prison Rules (EPR).
SMR Rule no. 19 and EPR Part II, Rule 24 offer specific guidance in
this.
The Delegation was concerned to learn that some detainees have been in
the Central Police Station in these
conditions for up to six or seven days.
Recommendation 5: Ensure that detainees are kept in police detention
facilities for as short a period as
possible and are not used to detain prisoners for overnight stays.
Finding 6: The conditions of detainees kept in isolation in the
Belgrade Central Prison were unacceptable
The Delegation saw that most prisoners kept in isolation at the
Belgrade Central Prison are kept in small, badly lit cells with poor
lighting and ventilation. It also learned that most were denied
exercise and were kept in the cells all the time and were taken out
infrequently and mainly for the purpose of questioning.
The cumulative and combined effects of the underlying illegality of
extended periods of detention coupled with
the substandard conditions of detention for many detainees amounts to
degrading punishment or treatment which is incompatible with Article 3
of the Convention against Torture and Other, Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment and Punishment (CAT), Article 3 of the ECHR and
Article 7 of the ICCPR.
The Delegation noted that the increased population at the prison also
appeared to decrease the possibility for
exercise for all prisoners. It noted that the 2001 assessment found
that the exercise facilities in the Belgrade Central Prison were
already inadequate for the then population of some 400 detainees and
the exercise periods too short. The current population is reported to
be more than 1,000.
Recommendation 6: Ensure that all prisoners are allowed adequate
exercise of at least one hour per day and that
other steps are taken to improve the conditions in the isolation cells
in the Belgrade Central Prison.
Finding 7: Procedures for registering complaints
During the visit to the Belgrade Central Police Station and the
Belgrade Central Prison the Delegation was
briefed about the procedures in place to submit complaints to internal
or external control bodies. The
procedures within the prison which were described to and seen by the
Delegation represented a very centralised
approach to the airing of complaints. They seemed to be an inadequate
guarantee and did not provide for
independent and transparent analysis of complaints. The inadequacy of
the current method was also reflected in
the poor confidence of the detainees in the effectiveness of the
internal investigations.
This concern seems particularly relevant as during the visit, the
Delegation heard allegations or saw
indications of torture or ill-treatment during arrest concerning two
detainees. It was unable to verify in full
the veracity of these allegations, but the Delegation considers it
important that detainees are able to report
any such allegations with confidence in seeing their complaints
promptly addressed. The Delegation also heard
accounts of forms of questioning and pressure during interrogation
which would appear to be inappropriate,
particularly when they involve young women.
Recommendation 7: Improve the possibilities for detainees to
communicate with the relevant authorities
concerning their conditions of detention and develop a long-term plan
of revision of the internal control
systems in both the police and prison systems. Any allegations of
ill-treatment should be subject to prompt and
proper investigation with the invocation of appropriate criminal
and/or disciplinary proceedings against the
officials concerned.
Finding 8: Proportionality of the measures applied to each detainee
The Delegation found that the physical conditions of detention and the
possibilities to communicate within the
prison or the outside world varied enormously. There appeared to be no
clear rationale as to why certain
measures were applied in general or in individual cases. As indicated
in finding 4, there appeared to be
elements of arbitrariness and a lack of transparent regulations and
guidelines.
Recommendation 8: Re-examine on an individual basis whether the
measures applied, such as detention in
isolation, are proportionate and justifiable in each case. Ensure that
the decisions on the application of these measures are subject to
regular review in each case.
Finding 9: Health and medical provisions
A number of prisoners kept in isolation complained of inadequate
medical and provision, including difficulties
in obtaining the necessary medicines, items for personal hygiene and
clean clothes. They also complained that
they were unable to communicate to their families their state of
health and learn of the health of their
relatives. Some detainees were not confident that they had prompt
access to doctors or doctors who were familiar with their existing
medical conditions.
Partial or incorrect information about the health or aspects of the
situation of has reached the relatives of
detainees either through media reports or word of mouth. In some cases
they allege that they heard information
officially.
The Delegation would draw attention to Rules 25 and 62 of the SMR and
Rules 29-62 in Part II of the EPR Part II
which provide more guidance on provisions for medical care and SMR
Rule 15 and EPR Part II, Rule 20 which
describe the requirements necessary to ensure personal hygiene.
If requested, an organization such as the International Committee of
the Red Cross should be able to address
these needs.
Recommendation 9: Improve access to medical care and provision of
clean clothes, personal hygiene items and
facilities. As an additional safeguard, invite the assistance of an
independent organization with capacity to
address the medical and hygienic and related needs of the detainees
and allow the possibility of communication
with their families.
/Ends
United Nations Office Of The High Commissioner For Human Rights,
Serbia And Montenegro
Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe Mission to Serbia
and Montenegro
1. IMPORTANT LINKS to articles about the "state of emergency" in
Serbia and its implications.
Many authors agree about the anti-democratic and mafia character of
the ruling mafia coalition, independent from their very different
point of views.
2. MISCELLANEA
Agencies and short articles about the "state of emergency" and NATO/US
support.
3. United Nations Office Of The High Commissioner For Human Rights,
Serbia And Montenegro:
Confidential Memorandum To The Ministries Of Justice And The Interior
Of The Republic Of Serbia. Initial findings and recommendations
arising from the visit to detainees in Belgrade 14-15 April 2003
For a very good summary of the recent events in Serbia we advice to
read:
BHHRG: THE KIROV MURDER REVISITED?
Zoran Djindjic's assassination and Serbia's political elite
An analysis of the events surrounding the assassination of Serbia's
prime minister on 12th March 2003
http://www.oscewatch.org/CountryReport.asp?CountryID=20&ReportID=197
=== 1 ===
IMPORTANT LINKS to articles about the "state of emergency" in Serbia
and its implications.
Many authors agree about the anti-democratic and mafia character of
the ruling mafia coalition, independent from their very different
point of views.
=== * ===
THE ARGUMENT OF FORCE. SERBIA UNDER MARTIAL LAW
by Nebojsa Malic
Antiwar.com - March 27, 2003
http://www.antiwar.com/malic/m032703.html
<<...Djindjic's murder has been blamed on "remnants of the Milosevic
regime", both by the Serbian government and the Imperial press. It is
hard to say exactly who claimed it first, though the accusations
seemed to appear in American papers sooner than in official Serbian
statements....>>
WASHINGTON'S STOOGE:
DJINDJIC ASSASSINATION EXPOSES U.S. ROLE IN SERBIA
By Heather Cottin
Reprinted from the March 27, 2003 issue of Workers World newspaper
http://www.workers.org/ww/2003/djindjic0327.php
<<...Djindjic had the distinction of being one of the only nationally
known politicians in Serbia to support the U.S./NATO 78-day bombing
campaign of Yugoslavia that began exactly four years ago on March 24,
1999... The Serbian government is using Djindjic's assassination
as an excuse to institute political repression, directing their
attacks on the remaining supporters of Slobodan Milosevic...
Zoran Djindjic was the corrupt beneficiary of U.S. regime change
and instituted the economic reforms that destroyed Yugoslavian
society as surely as the NATO bombs destroyed its infrastructure...>>
RUSSIAN COMMUNIST PARTY AGAINST STATE OF EMERGENCY IN SERBIA
Press service of the Russian Communist Party
Pravda.RU: Politics. 2003-04-01
http://english.pravda.ru/politics/2003/04/01/45411.html
<<...Western countries, which allegedly take care of their democracy,
ignore the fact that civil freedoms in Serbia are imperiled greatly at
present moment. The People's Patriotic Union of Russia denounces the
use of the state of emergency in Serbia as a way to intimidate
political opponents of the present government...>>
A FALLING-OUT AMONG THIEVES?
John Laughland
"All News is Lies", Sanders Research Associates, April 7, 2003
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0304/S00233.htm
<<...The West has not been able to contain its enthusiasm for this
massive crackdown in Serbia. The Union of Serbia and Montenegro (as
Yugoslavia is now known) was admitted last week to Europe's main human
rights body, the Council of Europe - at the height of these purges and
mass arrests... while the all-powerful US ambassador in Belgrade,
William Montgomery, also stated that "the international community
supports the Serbian government's fight against organised crime". As
Montgomery added, again without a trace of irony, that a contract had
just been signed between US Steel, based in Pittburgh, and the Sartid
company to buy the steel works at Smederevo...>>
THE ZORAN DJINDJIC ASSASSINATION: "DEMOCRACY" AT WORK?
by TV Weber
http://www.serbianna.com/columns/weber/002.shtml
<<...After Tito's death, the image of the Serbs took another
unexpected transformation, to that of insane nationalists, responsible
for all the evils in the Balkans. But now, with Yugoslavia dissolved
and Milosevic on ice in the Hague, the press wants to view the Serbs
as a bunch of gangsters...>>
AN INNOCENT ABROAD: POWELL IN BELGRADE
by Srdja Trifkovic
ChroniclesExtra, April 10, 2003
http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/News/Trifkovic/NewsViews.htm
<<..The campaign against Kostunica indicates the real
government agenda: to eliminate political and media opposition in
advance of the lifting of the state of emergency, so that a snap
election-with a preordained result-can be called before the opposition
recovers and regroups...>>
BOLSHEVIKS IN BELGRADE. SERBIAN PURGES UNMASKED
by Nebojsa Malic
Antiwar.com - April 10, 2003
http://www.antiwar.com/malic/m041003.html
<<...And what a purge it is: judges, military and police officials,
lawyers, even some politicians, all have been targeted in the past
three weeks, and the hunt is about to get even bigger...>>
POST-YUGOSLAVIA AND THE EXCEPTIONAL STATE OF SERBIA-MONTENEGRO
Tamara Vukov Interviews Andrej Grubacic, April 22, 2003
http://www.zmag.org/content/print_article.cfm?itemID=3498§ionID=36
<<...A few days ago, the vice-president of the government announced
that we should not complain that there is no opposition. Now we are a
democracy, so opposition is no longer necessary - we are so
democratic, that no opposition needs to exist. This is so-called
"total democracy." A situation in which democracy, in its total
self-fulfillment, abolishes itself. They are so devoted to democracy
that they no longer need it... The NGOs and rent-a-dissidents are
supporting it, promising complete loyalty to the Serbian
government...>>
AFTER PROMISING "DEMOCRACY"
by John Catalinotto
http://www.workers.org/ww/2003/serbia0417.php
<<...A state of emergency continues. Some 7,000 people were arrested,
with 2,000 held in prison for investigation, say both European press
accounts and dispatches direct from Belgrade. There can be no
criticism of the government, no demonstrations or strikes. Not even
public statements are allowed. The threat is now that parties will be
forbidden...>>
"SHOCK AND AWE" IN TURBULENT SERBIA
By David Binder, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR (WASHINGTON, May 16)
http://www.msnbc.com/news/911513.asp or
http://www.icdsm.org/more/shock.htm
<<...HOW ELSE TO characterize a 65-day state of emergency with 10,111
citizens questioned by the police, some 4,000 detained, 45 indicted
for "inciting terrorism and murder," the mysterious gunning down of
two prime suspects, sharp curbs on the independent press and
television, dismissal of judges and the imposition of draconian
laws?...>>
STATE OF EMERGENCY AS THE INTRODUCTION TO THE DICTATORSHIP
Spomenka Deretic, Belgrade, 10 May 2003
http://www.artel.co.yu/en/izbor/jugoslavija/2003-05-11.html
<<...Among more than ten thousand imprisoned citizens of Serbia are
also several newspapermen. The majority of them are released, but the
work is forbidden to the editors of the only two papers that were not
under the complete control of the current authorities in Serbia....>>
BHHRG: THE KIROV MURDER REVISITED?
Zoran Djindjic's assassination and Serbia's political elite
An analysis of the events surrounding the assassination of Serbia's
prime minister on 12th March 2003
http://www.oscewatch.org/CountryReport.asp?CountryID=20&ReportID=197
<<...It was puzzling that a cameraman had managed to be conveniently
situated outside the government building to record the moment Dr.
Djindjic was shot. There were no special events scheduled for the
12th March - the prime minister was only arriving for work as usual.
Even stranger, was the fact that the security cameras covering the
entrance and scene of the crime had been switched off...>>
=== 2 ===
MISCELLANEA
Agencies and short articles about the "state of emergency" and NATO/US
support.
=== * ===
Objective responsibility of the Serbian Government
http://www.dss.org.yu/nasstav.asp#1389
PRESS RELEASE BY THE DSS PRESIDENCY, 7.04.2003
OBJECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE SERBIAN GOVERNMENT
It is precisely because of its pronounced European orientation that
the Democratic Party of Serbia will use all means at its disposal so
that the truth about the seamy side of the state of emergency in
Serbia can reach the local and international public
At this evening's meeting chaired by Vojislav Kostunica, the DSS
Presidency discussed the situation in the country nearly a month after
the assassination of Serbian premier Zoran Djindjic and the
introduction of a state of emergency, and decided that the tardy
measures implemented by the Serbian government, clearly targeted
against organised crime though, do not have a comprehensive character.
The Democratic Party of Serbia has been a fervent advocate of an
all-inclusive and unselective struggle against all forms of organised
crime for years.
For this effort, the party, its president and his aides have been
attacked time and again and exposed to the genuine atmosphere of
lynch. This is particularly the case today.
The logical question is what the state of emergency is good for in the
hands of the Serbian government if it is quite clear that the
proclaimed purpose is not the only one. Aside from the uncontestable
results it has produced, the purpose of the state of emergency is to
keep the ruling coalition in power at all cost, relying on a doubtful
majority in the Serbian parliament, to help it shun responsibility for
the reforms it pledged but failed to carry out, for a wracked economy
and the sell-off of national companies, for growing unemployment rates
and flourishing commercial crime and corruption. There is also no need
to waste words on those who got rich recklessly under the former
regime and have now found secure livelihood with the new regime
composed of the remnants of the Democratic Opposition of Serbia.
After all, is there anyone else to blame for the fact that crime had
assumed the proportions that allowed for the murder of premier
Djindjic but the very same government? It is exactly the Serbian
cabinet that made it
possible for all sorts of crime to burgeon by denying that organised
crime existed at all. It is the Serbian government that has openly
sided with one criminal group clashed with another by preparing the
leader of one of them for the role of a protected witness. The very
fact that the Serbian government's State Security Council
coordinated the work of the Spec-Ops Unit since early January 2002
tells us that the responsibility for the assassination of premier
Djindjic lies with the government staff. The fact that the justice
minister plays an important role in the High Judicial Council points
to his objective responsibility for the appointment of Milan
Sarajlic as a deputy to the Serbian public prosecutor. The fact that a
Serbian deputy premier visited Dusan Spasojevic in jail and took him
out of it, and then was friends with him, also points to the objective
responsibility for links with an organised criminal group.
Serbia and Montenegro's membership of international organisations,
including the Council of Europe since not long ago, implies certain
rights and, even more so - obligations. Among other things, this
membership requires
that all the questions posed here be answered. It is precisely because
of its pronounced European orientation that the Democratic Party of
Serbia will use all means at its disposal so that the truth about the
seamy side of the state of emergency in Serbia can reach the local and
international public alike. We are not going to let the flag raised in
Strasbourg after two and a half years of hard work be tarnished by the
autocracy of the DOS core plainly intending to restore the one-party
system we once had in Serbia.
=
Information Service of the Democratic Party of Serbia
---
Evidence instead of fabrications
http://www.dss.org.yu/nasstav.asp#1417
PRESS RELEASE, 11.04.2003
EVIDENCE INSTEAD OF FABRICATIONS
This is virtually about an invented conspiracy in the
making, which followed the authentic one that led
to the murder of the premier, while the media are
just tipped off who is the next to be removed from
the political and public life
The Democratic Party of Serbia will cooperate
with all truly democratic forces and the civil
sector, fighting against blatant human rights
violations and threats to democratic institutions.
Likewise, it will not hesitate to internationalise
this problem, since the admission of Serbia and
Montenegro into the Council of Europe implies
both rights and obligations in this regard.
At today's briefing for editors-in-chief of
Serbian media, a government representative
informed the reporters about what allegedly was
the latest discovery in the investigation into the
assassination of premier Zoran Djindjic.
According to this "discovery", the blame for the
crime falls on a coalition of patriotic forces,
which, as they insinuate, has been led by the
Democratic Party of Serbia. Let alone that such
an allegation might imply that some parties in the
country are not patriotic.
Not for a moment contesting its genuinely
democratic and national orientation, the
Democratic Party of Serbia is openly pointing out
that it is now crystal clear that the state of
emergency, instead of allowing for an authentic
showdown with all forms of organised crime, has
been used for a showdown with the Serbian
strongest political party.
Everyone should be clear already that the
prisons have been closed and visits by family and
lawyers banned precesily to allow the
government's mouthpiece to seize the role of the
sole source of information about who purportedly
said what during the investigation. Accordingly,
the first thing to be done is to make up a
statement by a prisoner, and than develop it into a
concocted version that might serve as a basis for
the arrest of political rivals.
This is virtually about an invented
conspiracy in the making, which followed the
authentic one that led to the murder of the
premier, while the media are just tipped off who is
the next to be removed from the political and
public life. Isn't this undeniable evidence of a
political abuse of the state of emergency? Today,
Gradimir Nalic has been mentioned; tomorrow -
anyone can be mentioned and as falsely accused,
without the possibility of communicating at least
with lawyers. Moreover, extremely compromised
and blackmailed persons have been used as
supposedly reliable witnesses during the
investigation.
Information Service of the Democratic Party of Serbia
---
STATE OF EMERGENCY ENDS
BELGRADE, April 22 (Beta) - Acting Serbian President Natasa Micic on
April 22 lifted the state of emergency that was introduced on March
12, after the assassination of Serbian premier Zoran Djindjic.
Addressing the public, the acting Serbian president said that the
steps taken during the state of emergency had yielded results, since
"the perpetrators and organizers of Djindjic's assassination and many
other crimes have been found and will be brought to justice."
"We have dealt the final blow to organized crime. We have dismantled
Milosevic's [sic] criminal apparatus and stopped the spiral of
violence that has been tearing our country apart for over a decade.
The country has been preserved," Natasa Micic said.
She pointed out that the state institutions defended the country "with
full respect to international standards during the state of emergency.
She said that the authorities were now facing a reform of the
SerbianMontenegrin army, stressing that the army "used to be an
institution that managed to avoid public control for decades."
The acting Serbian president also said that Serbia should face the
fact that certain individuals had committed war crimes on its behalf.
"There will be elections and therefore a chance for campaigning and a
new distribution of political power, in accordance with the will of
the people. Until then, let us do what the people have clearly
demanded from us: finish the job we have started," Micic said.
COMMENTS ON DECISION TO LIFT STATE OF EMERGENCY
BELGRADE, April 22 (Beta) - OSCE CHAIRMAN: OSCE chairman Dutch Foreign
Minister Japp de Hoop Scheffer said in Belgrade on April 22 that the
OSCE would have applied pressure [sic] on the Serbian government had
it not chosen to lift the state of emergency. He said that there had
been no abuse during this period.
"Had the state of emergency continued, the OSCE would have applied
pressure to have it lifted," Scheffer said, after meeting with Serbia
and Montenegro President Svetozar Marovic, Serbian Premier Zoran
Zivkovic and Foreign Minister Goran Svilanovic.
Scheffer said that no country could exist in a prolonged state of
emergency. He said he hoped that everyone involved in the
assassination of Serbian premier Zoran Djindjic would be brought to
justice and that this could be accomplished in regular conditions.
PROSECUTOR AND PRESIDENT OF SERBIA'S SUPREME COURT ELECTED
BELGRADE, April 23 (Tanjug) - The Serbian Parliament Tuesday elected
Acting President of the Supreme Court of Serbia Sonja Brkic as
president of this court, while Acting Republican Public Prosecutor
Djordje Ostojic was elected as Public Prosecutor.
The Parliament released former Supreme Court president Leposava
Karamarkovic and former public prosecutor Sinisa Simic of their
duties at their own request [sic]. The newly elected President of the
Supreme Court and the Public Prosecutor took oath before the MPs.
SERBIAN LEGISLATION PASSES PUBLIC INFORMATION LAW
BELGRADE, April 22 (Beta)-The Serbian Legislature adopted on April 22
a law on public information, which regulates the numerous rights and
obligations of journalists, because it provides for the greater
protection of persons who are the subjects of information.
Several amendments were made to the government's proposal of the law,
including the provision under which information must be accessible to
all media under equal conditions.
Government representatives explained that the reason that the
provision on the free access to information was absent from the new
law is the fact that a special law on this is soon to be adopted.
One of the principal objections to the new public information law made
by Serbian experts and media representatives is the possibility of
banning the distribution of newspapers and magazines [sic], which was
rejected as unacceptable in the course of the public debate.
The possibility of banning the distribution of information was
included in order to prevent the propagation of war, incitement to
direct violence or the advocacy of racial, national or religious
hatred, as well as in cases when a published or broadcast information
might have direct "grave, irreparable consequences which cannot be
prevented in any other way."
---
LIGHT THROWN ON 28 MURDERS - MIHAJLOVIC
BELGRADE, April 29 (Tanjug) - Serbian Interior Minister Dusan
Mihajlovic said on Tuesday that during the Operation Sword, light had
been thrown on 28 murders, 23 attempts of murder, 45 exortitions, 15
kidnappings, 208 criminal acts of illegal production, keeping and
putting into traffic of drugs, and other criminal acts.
Mihajlovic told a press conference that as of March 12, 2003, the
police had filed 3,919 criminal charges against 3,400 persons, due to
sustained suspicion that they had committed 5,812 criminal acts.
He also said that 1,325 peaces of various weaponry had been taken
away, as well 357 hand granades, 110,097 pieces of various
ammunition, 74,830 kg.of different drugs and many other objects.
---
http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/
FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1051389842266&p=1012571727166
Financial Times May 8, 2003
Bush backs military support for Serbia
By Eric Jansson and James Politi
President George W. Bush yesterday authorised the US
to provide military assistance to Serbia and
Montenegro, offering Belgrade's new leader Zoran
Zivkovic, who recently replaced assassinated prime
minister Zoran Djindjic, one of the strongest
indications yet of international support for his
policies.
The White House said the decision followed
"significant steps" taken by Mr Zivkovic's government.
In the past week, officials from Serbia and Montenegro
agreed to place the military under civilian command,
ordered the police to arrest any individuals sought by
UN war crimes prosecutors, and sacked some
Milosevic-era generals.
The moves, according to Reuters, were described by US
officials as an important step in Serbia and
Montenegro's bid to join Nato's Partnership for Peace.
James Politi in Washington and Eric Jansson in Belgrade
---
http://www.b92.net/english/news/index.php?lang=english&version=
standard&my_categories_class=%27News%27&nav_category=
&nav_id=22668&order=priority&style=headlines
NATO offers help to achieve alliance standards
Beta, AP May 7, 2003
BRUSSELS -- Wednesday -- NATO today welcomed military
restructuring in Serbia-Montenegro and offered help
implementing more democratic changes, which would
enhance the country's bid to join the alliance.
After being presented with the programme for military
restructuring and civilian control by federal Defence
Minister Boris Tadic and army chief-of-staff Branko
Krga, NATO ambassadors expressed support for the state
union.
An anonymous NATO official told agency AP "the
minister made a very convincing presentation", adding
that the 19-nation alliance had offered to send a
group of expert reform advisors to Serbia-Montenegro.
He explained that the assassination of PM Djindjic had
prompted NATO ambassadors to hasten reforms in
Belgrade saying:
"The murder of Djindjic galvanized the emphasis on
reform. There is a sense of urgency that did not exist
before and we want to develop closer relations."
Tadic: membership within the year
Following the Brussels presentation, Tadic said that
he expects the new state union to join NATO?s
Partnership for Peace programme within the year.
Expressing hope that Serbia-Montenegro will accept
suggestions regarding full cooperation with The Hague
Tribunal and the International Court of Justice, Tadic
said that NATO Secretary General George Robertson and
the NATO Council had offered support to the
presentation outlining a concept of regional security.
The concept, presented by Tadic and Krga, calls for a
regional security policy for the Balkan Peninsula,
which will ensure there are no alliances between some
Balkan states against other Balkan states.
Strong support
Tadic also said that the armed forces civilian-control
reform plan had been well received and that
practically all ambassadors strongly supported the
Supreme Defence Council?s decision to transfer
military jurisdiction to the ministry of defence.
The defence minister confirmed the readiness of NATO
ambassadors to back Serbia-Montenegro's accession to
the programme, provided concrete steps are taken.
He added: "We will continue to cooperate with The
Hague tribunal and I am sure that we will meet all the
pre-conditions. I want to believe that we will become
a member of the partnership for Peace this year".
---
From: Mrs. Jela Jovanovic
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2003 6:00 PM
Subject: Scandals are shaking Serbian government
DAN-PODGORICA
Scandals are shaking Serbian government
- Assistant of the Health Minister falsified her diploma
- Minster Dusan Mihajlovic covered up the case of a double murder
Mrs. Aleksandra Makaj, assistant of the Minister of health in the
Government of Serbia is caught in forgery.
Mrs. Makaj is member of the Socialdemocratic party of Slobodan Orlic.
She was in the group of putschists that took the Socialdemocratic
party from Vuk Obradovic. Afterwards the Supreme court of Serbia
returned the Party to Vuk Obradovic, but the leader of the putschists,
Mr. Slobodan Orlic, with his mercenaries kept all the Assembly
representatives' mandates and functions.
Mrs. Aleksandra Makaj, presenting herself as the graduated student of
the Medicine faculty of the Zagreb University, became the assistant to
the Minister of health. Her domain is sanitary surveillance.
Through the checking at the Medicine Faculty in Zagreb, it was
ascertained that Mrs. Aleksandra Utopljenikov (her maiden name), born
of father Georgije and mother Anka in Virovitica 1952,Croatia, never
finished this Faculty. Minister's assistant is these days under the
surveillance of the Ministry of the interior affairs. She had, in
cooperation with her party colleagues, imported 20 thousand tons of
genetically modified crushed seeds. Serbia is in danger that EU
forbids the import of food from it.
In spite of the existence of the report that the assistant of the
Minister of health not only does not have the Diploma of the Medical
doctor, but not even the elementary education in the field of
medicine, the Government of Serbia refused to release her from the
duty. On the site of the Government of Serbia one can still read that
Mrs. Makaj is by profession doctor specialist. For fraud, as it seams.
Party colleague of Mrs. Makaj, representative in the Assembly and the
director of the Belgrade Fair, Mr. Branko Gligoric, seven month ago,
on the hill Goc killed by his vehicle two students of the Ministry of
interior
affairs, that were on the course for the multiethnic police in the
south of Serbia. He drove the car in the state of heavy alcohol
intoxication. Two youngsters passed away five days later in the
hospital. Minister Dusan
Mihajlovic covered up this case of double murder.
Milovan BRKIC
Wednesday, 21. May, 2003
=== 3 ===
Source: http://www.icdsm.org/more/shock.htm
or: http://www.ohchr.org/news/State%20of%20Emergency%
20%20UNHCHR-ODIHR-OSCE%20Memorandum%20on%20Detention%
20Facilities%2024%20April%202003.doc
United Nations Office Of The High Commissioner For Human Rights,
Serbia And Montenegro
Confidential Memorandum To The Ministries Of Justice And The Interior
Of The Republic Of Serbia
Initial findings and recommendations arising from the visit to
detainees in Belgrade 14-15 April 2003
CONFIDENTIAL
Following their joint visit to places of detention and detainees in
Belgrade on 14 and 15 April 2003 the UN
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, OSCE Mission to
Serbia and Montenegro and OSCE Office of
Democratic Institutions and Human Rights have identified nine urgent
recommendations which they would draw to
the attention of the authorities in the Republic of Serbia.
These recommendations are not intended to represent the complete
findings and recommendations of the three
institutions. Rather, they represent a number of urgent steps which,
if implemented, the Delegation considers
would immediately improve the situation of persons detained following
the imposition of the state of emergency.
The three institutions will issue a comprehensive joint report of
their findings and recommendations in due
course. This report will expand upon the recommendations below and be
complemented by additional ones. The three institutions would like to
draw the Government's attention to the fact that, in its observations,
many of the problems do not arise directly from the conditions under
the state of emergency, but are long-standing problems concerning the
Belgrade Central Prison which were identified during assessment visits
in 2001. The state of emergency has exacerbated most of these problems
and that certain provisions of the amended Law on the Suppression of
Organised crime are likely to continue doing so unless appropriate
safeguards are promptly introduced.
The three institutions welcome the lifting of the state of emergency
orders on 22 April. Although the provisions relating to detention
under the state of emergency are no longer in force, they consider
that the findings and recommendations pertaining to detention
contained in this memorandum remain relevant. They base this on
recognition of the fact that the pressures on Serbia's criminal
justice system remain; that provisions for extended detention without
judicial supervision remain in force under the amended Law on the
Suppression of
Organized Crime; and the continued existence of systemic problems
which have previously been identified
following the 2001 prison assessment, the visit of the Committee
against Torture in 2002 and other assessments.
Besides the matters requiring attention which are identified below,
the Delegation would like to record that
welcome improvements upon the situation in 2001 were noted. These
included improved relationships between
detainees and prison guards. The Delegation heard consistently
positive references to the guards from detainees
during their confidential interviews. In addition the Delegation also
noted that all government officials were
helpful and open in their discussions with it.
The three institutions hope that the initial findings and
recommendations contained in this memorandum will be
of assistance to the Government in its efforts to combat organized
crime and uphold the rule of law on
accordance with the relevant international standards. They look
forward to delivering the full report in the
near future and of having the opportunity to carry up follow-up visits
to places of detention.
Findings and Recommendations
Section A: The legal basis for detention
Finding 1: The continued justification for detention without judicial
supervision
Article 4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
(ICCPR) states clearly that derogations of rights guaranteed under the
Covenant must be strictly limited to those required by the exigencies
of the
situation. Both the procedures under the state of emergency and the
recent amendments to the Law on the
Suppression of Organized Crime include provisions for extended periods
of detention without adequate judicial
supervision. These are clearly not in conformity with the
international human rights standards, notably Article
9(4) of the ICCPR and Article 5(4) of the European Convention for the
Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR). The
commentaries and case law indicate that detainees may be held without
judicial supervision for a few days as an absolute maximum, even in
times of public emergency.
The Delegation found that the justification for the continued
detention of individuals without judicial
supervision was unclear in many cases, particularly as many
individuals had not been subject to any form of
questioning for many days and that much time has passed since the
initial emergency following the assassination.
Some, who had been in detention for several days, reported that they
had not been questioned at all.
With the ending of the state of emergency, which has occurred since
the visit, all derogations to the right to
be brought promptly before a judge are to be considered invalid and
therefore detention without charge is no
longer permissible. Therefore the detainees must be either charged
with a criminal offence or released in
accordance with Article 9 of the ICCPR.
The Delegation was particularly concerned that the combination of
detention without judicial supervision
combined with some of the other findings given below meant that human
rights violations were being compounded or exacerbated by a
combination of these factors.
Recommendation 1: Re-examine, on the basis of the facts of each case,
whether the conditions continue to warrant the detention of each
individual detained since the state of emergency was introduced
(including those detained under the amended Law on the Suppression of
Organized Crime). Ensure that detainees are either released or charged
with a criminal offence and kept in further detention only on the
basis of judicial decisions. These decisions should be subject to
regular review.
Finding 2: Information about status and rights for detainees; access
to counsel; procedures for considering
appeals
International standards as well as the principles established in the
Constitutional Charter of the State Union
and the Code of Criminal Procedure emphasize the rights right of
detainees to be informed of their status and
rights as well as being given access to legal counsel to protect their
interests. The state of emergency
suspended or restricted a number of rights relating to communication
with the outside world including visits by
families and communication with legal counsel. While some of these
restrictions may be justified as exceptions
required by the exigencies of the situation, applied on a case-by-case
basis and for short periods, they appear
instead to have been applied on a group basis or in an arbitrary way
and often for extended periods.
The Delegation found that many detainees were unclear about their
status and rights. There appeared to be no
systematic process to ensure that detainees were informed of their
right to challenge detention under the state
of emergency order. The confusion about their status, rights, and
possibilities for communication extended to
detainees who had passed to detention on judicial orders or on the
orders of the Special Prosecutor.
Recommendation 2: Carry out a systematic process of informing all
detainees of their status and rights. This
should include, inter alia, particular attention to those who were
initially detained under orders issued under
the state of emergency, but are now passing into other forms of
detention. Ensure that all detainees are given
immediate access to legal counsel.
Finding 3: Appeals procedures
At least one detainee was informed in writing that he had to submit
any appeal within 12 hours of receiving the
decision on his detention. No effective deadlines existed for ruling
on appeals; at least one detainee received
the negative decision around the 30th day of his 30-day detention. The
processes for communicating between
detainees and the authorities were not transparent in ensuring
adequate recording and issuing receipts for
communications. The Delegation also felt that a review by the Minister
of Internal Affairs was not a
sufficiently independent mechanism. The Delegation is concerned that
these problems persist for detainees held
under the provisions of the amended Law on the Suppression of
Organized Crime.
Recommendation 3: Introduce judicial supervision of all detainees
immediately. Introduce a clear and consistent
procedure regulating the process of allowing detainees to appeal
against detention, ensuring that there are no
temporal limits on the detainees' right to appeal and that all appeals
are ruled upon and communicated to the
individual concerned within 24 hours.
Finding 4: Arbitrary factors controlling conditions of detention
The Delegation found that the applicable rules governing detainees
conditions of detention were not clear and
that they depended in part on individual decisions by the prison
authorities. This was particularly problematic
as these decisions and the procedures applied appeared variously to
influence the detainees' possibilities to
obtain medical supplies or sanitary items and to communicate with
families and legal counsel.
Recommendation 4: Ensure that the law and regulations applied do not
introduce arbitrary factors which affect
the possibility of detainees to obtain access to counsel or restrict
other rights.
Section B: Conditions of detention
Finding 5: Police facilities unsuitable for extended detention
The Delegation found that the facilities in the police station it
visited were unsuitable for anything other
than short periods of detention and were not suitable for overnight
stays. The reasons for the unsuitability
included, inter alia, the lack of beds for each detainee and of any
blankets or mattresses; inadequate
provisions for food and medical care; and inadequate lighting and
ventilation. All these are requirements
contained in the Standard Minimum Rules of the Treatment of Prisoners
(SMR) and the European Prison Rules (EPR).
SMR Rule no. 19 and EPR Part II, Rule 24 offer specific guidance in
this.
The Delegation was concerned to learn that some detainees have been in
the Central Police Station in these
conditions for up to six or seven days.
Recommendation 5: Ensure that detainees are kept in police detention
facilities for as short a period as
possible and are not used to detain prisoners for overnight stays.
Finding 6: The conditions of detainees kept in isolation in the
Belgrade Central Prison were unacceptable
The Delegation saw that most prisoners kept in isolation at the
Belgrade Central Prison are kept in small, badly lit cells with poor
lighting and ventilation. It also learned that most were denied
exercise and were kept in the cells all the time and were taken out
infrequently and mainly for the purpose of questioning.
The cumulative and combined effects of the underlying illegality of
extended periods of detention coupled with
the substandard conditions of detention for many detainees amounts to
degrading punishment or treatment which is incompatible with Article 3
of the Convention against Torture and Other, Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment and Punishment (CAT), Article 3 of the ECHR and
Article 7 of the ICCPR.
The Delegation noted that the increased population at the prison also
appeared to decrease the possibility for
exercise for all prisoners. It noted that the 2001 assessment found
that the exercise facilities in the Belgrade Central Prison were
already inadequate for the then population of some 400 detainees and
the exercise periods too short. The current population is reported to
be more than 1,000.
Recommendation 6: Ensure that all prisoners are allowed adequate
exercise of at least one hour per day and that
other steps are taken to improve the conditions in the isolation cells
in the Belgrade Central Prison.
Finding 7: Procedures for registering complaints
During the visit to the Belgrade Central Police Station and the
Belgrade Central Prison the Delegation was
briefed about the procedures in place to submit complaints to internal
or external control bodies. The
procedures within the prison which were described to and seen by the
Delegation represented a very centralised
approach to the airing of complaints. They seemed to be an inadequate
guarantee and did not provide for
independent and transparent analysis of complaints. The inadequacy of
the current method was also reflected in
the poor confidence of the detainees in the effectiveness of the
internal investigations.
This concern seems particularly relevant as during the visit, the
Delegation heard allegations or saw
indications of torture or ill-treatment during arrest concerning two
detainees. It was unable to verify in full
the veracity of these allegations, but the Delegation considers it
important that detainees are able to report
any such allegations with confidence in seeing their complaints
promptly addressed. The Delegation also heard
accounts of forms of questioning and pressure during interrogation
which would appear to be inappropriate,
particularly when they involve young women.
Recommendation 7: Improve the possibilities for detainees to
communicate with the relevant authorities
concerning their conditions of detention and develop a long-term plan
of revision of the internal control
systems in both the police and prison systems. Any allegations of
ill-treatment should be subject to prompt and
proper investigation with the invocation of appropriate criminal
and/or disciplinary proceedings against the
officials concerned.
Finding 8: Proportionality of the measures applied to each detainee
The Delegation found that the physical conditions of detention and the
possibilities to communicate within the
prison or the outside world varied enormously. There appeared to be no
clear rationale as to why certain
measures were applied in general or in individual cases. As indicated
in finding 4, there appeared to be
elements of arbitrariness and a lack of transparent regulations and
guidelines.
Recommendation 8: Re-examine on an individual basis whether the
measures applied, such as detention in
isolation, are proportionate and justifiable in each case. Ensure that
the decisions on the application of these measures are subject to
regular review in each case.
Finding 9: Health and medical provisions
A number of prisoners kept in isolation complained of inadequate
medical and provision, including difficulties
in obtaining the necessary medicines, items for personal hygiene and
clean clothes. They also complained that
they were unable to communicate to their families their state of
health and learn of the health of their
relatives. Some detainees were not confident that they had prompt
access to doctors or doctors who were familiar with their existing
medical conditions.
Partial or incorrect information about the health or aspects of the
situation of has reached the relatives of
detainees either through media reports or word of mouth. In some cases
they allege that they heard information
officially.
The Delegation would draw attention to Rules 25 and 62 of the SMR and
Rules 29-62 in Part II of the EPR Part II
which provide more guidance on provisions for medical care and SMR
Rule 15 and EPR Part II, Rule 20 which
describe the requirements necessary to ensure personal hygiene.
If requested, an organization such as the International Committee of
the Red Cross should be able to address
these needs.
Recommendation 9: Improve access to medical care and provision of
clean clothes, personal hygiene items and
facilities. As an additional safeguard, invite the assistance of an
independent organization with capacity to
address the medical and hygienic and related needs of the detainees
and allow the possibility of communication
with their families.
/Ends
United Nations Office Of The High Commissioner For Human Rights,
Serbia And Montenegro
Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe Mission to Serbia
and Montenegro