RECOM Initiative Voice-No.20-2015

8/9/2019 RECOM Initiative Voice-No.20-2015

1/40

Initiative for RECOM

1

20/2015February


2/40


3/40

1

CONTENTS

EDITORIAL

Zdravko Grebo

!We Shall Overcome....................2

IN THE NEWS

!Coalition for RECOM Supports Statute Changes....................5

!Debate on Dealing With the Past

at the Croatian National Theatre in Rijeka....................6

IN THE NEWS

Oliver Frljic

!It is Glorious to Forget in the Name of the Motherland....................8

INTERVIEWPjer Zalica

!We’ve Concealed Too Many Dark Secrets ....................11

Zlatko Pakovic

!The Need for Complete Social Overhaul is Huge....................14

IN THE NEWS – NEWS ABOUT RECOM

!Report on the RECOM Process: October–December 2014.....................19

The Seventh Assembly of the Coalition for RECOM....................19

!The Letter to Presidents/Members of the Presidencyof Bosnia and Herzegovina ....................20

!The Tenth Forum for Transitional Justice in Post-Yugoslav Countries ....................21

Panel I: Achievements and Priorities in Criminal Justice –

the Civil Society Perspective....................22

Reparations for the Victims of Wars in the Former Yugoslavia....................25

Panel II: Achievements and Priorities of Transitional Justice –

Academic Perspective ....................25

Discussion ....................26

Panel III: Victims’ Perspectives....................29Panel IV: Using Facts in Theater Plays....................32

Panel V: Using Facts in Film....................32

Closing Remarks....................33

The Initiative for RECOM in the Media....................34

European Commission. This document has been produced with the nancial assistance ofthe European Union. The contents of this document are the sole responsibility of Coalition forRECOM and Humanitarian Law Center as project holder and can under no circumstances beregarded as reecting the position of the European Union.


4/40


2

Zdravko Grebo

Photo: Sutra.ba

Bracket the inelegance of praising a project you yourself are part of, but - I do think that

in all these years RECOM has indeed achieved some huge things. I say this, first, because I

think that neither the initiators nor the designers of the project understood how much po-

tential there really was in this action, because when the Initiative for RECOM was launched

and we began to explain its goals, the tissue of the former Yugoslavia was still wounded. It

was hard. War memories, which even today are not quite in the past, were fresh and sensi-

tive. But if you have managed to gather together various stakeholders in a single action

– different social groups, and interests or victim groups – and if you managed to show that

it was at least possible to talk, that a dialogue was possible (consensus is certainly more dif-ficult), you have shown that it is possible to gather together associations of inmates, victims,

veterans, lawyers and media workers, who are all trying, from their own angles, to contrib-

ute to the same idea – I think that’s a huge contribution.

Although the initial idea is still being challenged from different perspectives and in differ-

ent ways, the greatest success is that the idea has been able to survive all this time, despite

the diversity of the participants, the groups and individuals who have, nevertheless, made

this idea what it is now. In sum, if the idea of RECOM is to establish the human losses in the

armed conflicts – I use neutral terms intentionally – in the war, or rather wars, that took

place in the former Yugoslavia, and if you manage to bring together around this idea peoplewhom you cannot even imagine would so much as even look at each other, let alone talk,

then this is, in my opinion, the greatest achievement of the Coalition for RECOM.

RECOM is the only truly regional initiative which, even among its ardent advocates, has

been without conflicts, controversy, or dispute. And ultimately, why not say that there are

friends of mine – I’m talking about some prominent figures in the Coalition for RECOM –

who even today are a bit hesitant about it. However, RECOM is the only truly regional ini-

tiative, unless you want to consider – which would be rather cynical – that the court in the

EDITORIAL

!We ShallOvercome


5/40


3

Hague is another such regional institution which tries war criminals from Serbia, Croatia,

Kosovo, and so on.

In my opinion, this is an idea that is trying to achieve, in a

very honest way, a medium-term objective: to establish human

losses. e idea has two long-term objectives: 1) to prevent thatfacts not be established, as was the case after the Second World

War; and 2) to prevent facts being manipulated by the victors

or the losers – it is all the same – which is to say, facts being

used for political, utilitarian purposes, and every time there is

an opportunity – say, a conflict – resorting to these facts. Jasenovac seems to be the most obvi-

ous example. Some 700,000 people were killed in Jasenovac - or according to Zeraljic 70,000- or according to Franjo udjman, 7,000. Regardless of who is right here, obviously no one isright. Every human life counts, even if there is only one, but these people are repeatedly dug

up and abused – ultimately, in order to legitimize armed conflicts.Hence, the achievement of the Coalition for RECOM is truly great. In the countries that were

once in conflict, no one has ever managed to establish, on this regional level, the facts about

the number of people killed and their names. What remains for us – when I say “us”, I mean

our RECOM family – are the circumstances under which these people died. In the end, we

agreed that the Preamble to the Statute state this benchmark – the circumstances. But people

in Sarajevo say to me – that’s a betrayal, and it reduces matters to the question of determin-

ing the immediate cause. Why betrayal? Well, because we were the victims, because we were

attacked, because they were the aggressors, because genocide was committed in Bosnia and

Herzegovina, because we had the mass rapes andconcentration camps, and that’s not fair. Myanswer is – RECOM wants to establish the facts. Numbers sound ugly, because people are

not numbers - lives lost especially are not numbers. Establishing the circumstances under

which these people lost their lives is one thing; but the analysis, the assessment of the causes

of conflict is a whole other story, and it is not a story for RECOM. Of course, it is easy to say

that causes should be established by political analysts, historians, and so on. I personally have a

very precise opinion about all that – I know how the war broke out “on my island,” I know who

instigated these crimes, but all that is a whole other level of the story.

So, establishing the facts is the first task; then comes historical interpretation of the begin-

nings and, if you want, the end of the conflict; and then, third, comes punishing the warcriminals, which is a matter for the courts. e third level is something quite strange, a re-

cent creation – namely, the Hague Tribunal. erefore, I really think that if the second and

third levels – the analysis of the causes of the conflict and the trials – ever become contro-

versial, the first task (establishing the facts) can greatly contribute to the prevention of any

future manipulation of dead people.

We had the Forum, we had the Assembly meeting, some issues were reopened. Bu in the end,

the Assembly adopted a version of the Statute proposed by the delegates for RECOM. is is

If you manage to bring together

people whom you cannot even

imagine would so much as even

look at each other, let alone talk, then this is, in my opinion, the

greatest achievement of the Co-

alition for RECOM


6/40


4

still an non-governmental initiative. e process has taken a long time. Now, in the end, we

have what’s best – the Statute – the best we could collectively extract from ourselves. Having

adopted amendments and proposals I wasn’t always in favour of (but for the sake of a shared

success, why not accept them?), I really don’t know if there is anything else the Assembly of the

Coalition for RECOM could do.

And so the final version of the Statute was adopted, and now we have some-

thing we have been struggling with for the past two years, something I had a

role in as one of the advocates. Two years ago, we began visiting the capitals of

the states of the former Yugoslavia – we met with Vujanovic, Josipovic, Ivanov , with theBH Presidency, with Vucic, with the new government of Kosovo. And there we achievedsomething that will have to be realized now.

Our problem, the problem of the final success and realization of RECOM, is that RECOM must

now move from this phase to the state level. e presidents I mentioned had their representa-

tives in the preliminary phase – legal experts through whom presidents took part in the process.But now comes the deciding moment: whether RECOM will definitely be buried, or there is still

a chance. I think that there is a chance, and the chance lies in the fact that this group consisting

of the heads of states could decide to adopt the Initiative in the text previously proposed. On the

basis of this text, an intergovernmental regional body is to be officially instituted that will begin a

difficult and laborious task – the task of establishing the facts.

I sincerely hope that this is possible. What is slowing us down a bit in between these two

steps, are the general elections being held in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In an election atmo-

sphere, it is never appropriate for any politician to be affirmative and to say, “Yes, I firmly

stand behind this idea.” Zeljko Komsic did stand behind it, Bakir wavered, Radmanovic was against. Soon, Croatia will have its own presidential elections, and although Josipovic

has always been in favour of RECOM, recently he began making small concessions. I un-

derstand, they are politicians, they love votes. In Kosovo, strange things have happened in

relation to the formation of the government. We will see what Serbia will do – we may see

some turbulence there as well, although their government has said yes.

I want to believe that people are ready to do their job honestly – especially the political

elite, the media, the civil society. Which is to say – not to be propagandists, directing their

voice against the others, wherever they may appear to be coming from. If that happens in

this environment, in the Balkans, where people take a whole century to come to their sens-es... but I hope it won’t take that long…

I had many doubts. Today, when I think about it, I do not regret a single day, a single hour I

spent promoting RECOM.

We shall overcome.

Te author is a Law Professor at the University of Sarajevo, and a public advocate of the Initiative for

RECOM.

RECOM is the

only truly region-

al initiative


7/40


5

November 17, 2014

At its Seventh Assembly, held on November 14, 2014 in Belgrade, the Coalition for RECOM

has expressed support for the changes made to the RECOM Statute by the Envoys of the

Presidents of Montenegro, Serbia, Croatia, and Kosovo, and the Bosniak and Croatian2

Members of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina. e changes addressed the Envoys’

mandate to examine the constitutional and legal options for the establishment of RECOM in

their respective countries. e Coalition has reviewed the changes carefully and estimates

that “the essence of the Draft Statute has been preserved, [that] the abolition of the punitive

powers of the Commission removes the suspicion that RECOM would have judicial author-ity, and [that] the procedure for the nomination and appointment of members of the selec-

tion committee and the Commission has been significantly simplified.” e Coalition for

RECOM has welcomed the changes in the funding of the Commission, according to which

RECOM is to be funded through domestic and foreign donations, as well as through funds

from international organizations, rather than by funds provided by the

signatory parties, as previously proposed by the Coalition. e Coalition

has especially welcomed the Envoys’ position that among the objectives

of the Commission is “the enhancement of educational programmes in

accordance with the facts established by the Commission.” e Coalitionpoints out that the Envoys and Presidents/Members of the Presidency

are in complete agreement that the Commission should establish the

facts about war crimes and other human rights violations committed

during the period between January 1, 1991 and the end of December 2001.

2 e President of Macedonia, Gjorge Ivanov , has informed the Coalition for RECOM that he would support theestablishment of RECOM if the Presidents and Members of the BH Presidency reach a consensus on this issue.

The Coalition points

out that the Envoys

and Presidents/

Members of the Presi-dency are in complete

agreement.

!Coalition for RECOM Supports StatuteChanges

IN THE NEWS


8/40


6

As regards the “researching of the political and social circumstances that decisively contrib-

uted to the outbreak of the wars and the commission of war crimes and other violations of

human rights,” some believe that it is crucial for RECOM to inquire into the causes of the war

simultaneously with the facts while others are of the opinion that inquiry into the causes of the

war should be undertaken only after the facts about war crimes have been established. Both

options would be in full accordance with the proposals of the Coalition for RECOM.

e Coalition expects the Presidents / Members of the BH Presidency to inform the pub-

lic and national parliaments about their decisions to jointly support the establishment of

RECOM, and to do so no later than the end of January 2015. In this way, the post-Yugoslav

countries would for the first time in the history of post-conflict societies begin to be able to

construct, independently, and with no conditions or pressure from the international com-

munity, a regional mechanism for dealing with the past, which has the potential to elimi-

nate the deficiencies of criminal justice, as well as the lack of information on the detection of

the remaining mass graves, and to ensure respect for the facts and the personal experiencesof those who suffered as a consequence of the wars.

19th November, 2014

e Croatian National eatre Ivan pl. Zajc (CNT Ivan pl. Zajc) and the Coalition for RE-

COM on November 19, 2014 organized a public discussion entitled “e use of facts in the

theatrical portrayal of the reality of the 1990s” as an introduction to the play “e Croatian

eatre”, the final instalment of the “Trilogy of Croatian Fascism”, an authorial project by the

producer Oliver Frljić and the dramaturgist Marin Blažević.

!Debateon Dealing

With thePast at theCroatianNationalTheatre in Rijeka

Public discussion in Rijeka’s CN

Photo: Coalition for RECOM


9/40


7

e speakers included the producer of “e Croatian eatre”, Oliver Frljić, the theatre pro-

ducer from Bosnia and Herzegovina, Dino Mustafić, who has directed plays addressing war

themes and dealing with the past, particularly the 1990s wars, and the representative of the

Coalition for RECOM, Sven Milekić. Mustafić is also a public advocate for the Coalition for

RECOM, a broad coalition of associations, organizations and individuals from all seven ofthe newly-established states in the territory of the former Yugoslavia, who advocate the es-

tablishment of a regional commission to determine the facts about the wars fought between

1991 and 2001. One of the commission’s primary tasks will be to compile a name list of all

people from the territory of the former Yugoslavia who were killed, imprisoned, expelled

or otherwise made to suffer, as well as to open a broad social dialogue on all the crimes and

events which shaped our social reality.

Marin Blažević, the dramaturgist at CNT Ivan pl. Zajc, focused the discussion on the

theatre as a mirror of social reality, in which role it raises questions about and explores

issues not addressed by the academic community, the media or even the civil society. e

facts established by the police and the courts, and by non-governmental organizations and

commissions, must of necessity be contextualized, in order to demolish state myths and

the interpretations of history based thereon. As regards the mass crimes and extirpation

of human rights committed during the last wars, the facts must be presented at all levels

and through all available channels, in order to ensure for the victims at least some recom-

pense and to expose the perpetrators to society’s censure in cases where court judgement

are lacking.

A number of war veterans sat in the first row during the discussion. After the producers ex-plained to them how postdramatic theatre deals with documentary and political facts, they

left peacefully without asking any questions. With the assistance of the Sarajevo theatre pro-

ducer Dino Mustafić and the Coalition for RECOM activist Sven Milekić, Frljić and Blažević

explained why it was important for all sides in these parts to deal with their crimes. e audi-

ence, which packed the CNT lounge, was informed that Oliver Frljić was engaged on the same

project in Slovenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia. Sven Milekić explained the ways in

which the Coalition promotes the establishment of a region-wide body to prepare a name list

of all who were killed, went missing or were incarcerated as a result of the war.

Two days before the panel discussion in Rijeka, the 10th Forum for Transitional Justice

was held in Belgrade. At the Forum, the producers Dino Mustafić, Andrej Nosov , Stevan

Bodroža, Pjer Žalica and Lazar Stojanović, the dramaturgist Amir Bašović, and the Sa-

rajevo actors Maja Izetbegović and Alban Ukaj spoke about the artist’s need and respon-

sibility to deal with matters neglected or forgotten by official politics and left out of official

historiographies.


10/40


8

Nationalism, according to Ernest Gellner, is a political principle, which requires a coinci-

dence of political and ethnic boundaries. e nationalist narrative constructs the public

memory of those facts that can legitimize this principle. Anything that questions the afore-

mentioned correspondence becomes officially forgotten, or has its meaning relativized.

In such a context, the place where counter-memory appears is of paramount importance – the

memory that belongs to minority groups and that is “marginalized by the dominant culture.”

When it serves as an instrument for various forms of social domination and resistance to it,memory becomes a political agent. As regards the politics of the post-Yugoslav theatre space,

this space can be constituted precisely where official “memoricide” is re-

sisted, what official historiography has forgotten is commemorated, and

radical reinterpretations of facts are offered that do not proceed from the

premise of the nationalist congruency of the political and the national.

Sophocles’s Antigone showed this – a drama of imposed memories and imposed oblivion,

followed by the assertion of a resulting oblivion and counter-memory. e story of a sister

who decides to bury and mourn her brother who has been denied this right by decree of the

highest center of political power, this play can function as an allegory of post-Yugoslav soci-

eties and their policies of remembering and forgetting. But more than that, the play is about

the theatre as a place of liberating memory that has been prohibited.

e special status of memory, and specifically of counter-memory, has interested me in my

own theatre work from the very beginning. is is precisely the point at which the wider

public’s proverbial lack of interest in this medium is converted into distinct social antago-

nism. Instead of staging a conflict between fictional characters, theatre in this case generates

Whether it is about

General Gotovina

or anyone else – a

crime is a crime.

!It isGlorious to Forgetin the Name of theMotherland

IN THE NEWS

Oliver Frljic

Photo: Večernji list


11/40


9

a drama in the wider social field, in the space of normed forgetting and remembering in

which theatrical space appears as transgression.

My own theatre worldview and language – a source of constant misunderstandings and

challenge in most of the areas where I work – has been crafted precisely by my watching the

Croatian theatre’s active or passive participation in officially prescribed oblivion. My misun-derstandings with the Croatian theatre community culminated with the play Croatian Te-

atre, which was subjected to professional and media lynching

because it asked some questions: “Can we still call theatre that

which most of the Croatian theatre world has been producing

since the war, if we agree that theatre should be a social, ethical

and artistic act that has the courage to call a crime by its name,

to deprive it of the right to rationalization, and to determine its

guilt? What kind of theatre is it really, this majority Croatian

theatre, that fails to recognize the tragedy of its fellow citizens?What kind of a theatre is that which responds to fascism with

fascism?”

e fascism of the Croatian theatre I dealt with in that play, about which the theatrical left

and the theatrical right were both equally appalled, should be given a broader meaning - the

way it was defined by Michael Foucault, for whom alongside “historical fascism, the fascism

of Hitler and Mussolini,” there exists “the fascism in all of us, in our heads and in our ev-

eryday behaviour, the fascism of that makes us love power, that makes us want precisely that

which dominates and exploits us.” e gradual “becoming-fascist” of Croatian society came

about, among other things, through the uncritical attitude towards the authorities at the

time when it sponsored the murder of Croatian citizens of the “wrong” nationality, as was

the case with members of the Zec family, the murders in the Pakrac Valley, the naval port of

Lora, the establishment of the concentration camps for Bosniaks in Western Herzegovina,

the killing and expulsion of Serbs during Operation Storm. e Croatian theatre community

has failed to give names to these crimes, much less deny them “the right to have a justifica-

tion or to determine their guilt.”

On the contrary, in this period, the theatre community, through its work and public action,

and sometimes literally by taking up arms, took part in the HDZ’s war-propaganda machin-ery. In 1991 Hrvoje Hitrec established Te Croatian Artists’ Company, which included,

among others, actress Jasna Bilusic and actor Perica Martinovic, as well as director Josko

Juvancic and actor Ljubomir Kapor. Quite apart from from this Company, actor Sven

Lasta, and directors Miro Medjimorec and Slobodan Praljak also joined the war. Kresi-

mir Dolencic becomes a sort of court director in charge of directing various Tudjman cer-

emonies, the most famous of which was the Gojko Susak funeral and the military parade

at Jarun. In 1997, Zlatko Vitez directed in the Croatian National eatre in Zagreb a birth-

The gradual “becoming-

fascist” of Croatian society

came about by, among other

things, the uncritical attitude

towards the authorities at the

time when they sponsored the

murder of Croatian citizens of the “wrong” nationality.


12/40


10

day event for Franjo Tudjman in which, among other participants, appeared Ena Begovic,

Dragan Despot, Vanja Drach, Kruno Saric, Josko Sevo, Zlatko Crnkovic, Zarko Potoc-

njak, Franjo Kuhar, Mladen Vulic, Zvonimir Zoricic, Ivan Brkic, Ivanka Boljkovac, and

Marko orjana.

ere are many more examples, and these are sufficient to show that themajority of theatre people in Croatia succumbed to the national hysteria,

and that among them, unlike with some of their colleagues from Belgrade,

no anti-war discourse was articulated, even when Croatia was deep into

carving up Bosnia and Herzegovina, or when the information about the

war crimes committed by the Croatian army became public. It is not surprising, then, that

such a theatre community, which carried out its part in the officially prescribed forgetting

and silence, now wants to forget its own self at that time.

at theatre folks are suitable material for oblivion and for convenient ideological moulding

was shown with a post-war example, where once again we saw their high degree of mobilization

in a war that continued by other means. I am referring to the “Request by 555 prominent Croa-

tian public figures to the Government,” which required that the Croatian government refuse to

extradite General Gotovina to the Hague Tribunal, and that it request from the Hague Pros-

ecution the suspension of prosecution on the basis of the official indictment. e request was

signed by the following theater artists: Nada Abrus, Jasna Ancic, Inge Appelt, Ivica Barisic,

Slavko Brankov , Mirela Brekalo, Lukrecija Brešković, Ivan Brkic, Miljenko Brlecic, Senka

Bulic, Helena Buljan, Boris Buzancic, Zlatko Crnkovic, Branka Cvitkovic, Velimir Cokljat,

Dragan Despot, Boris Dvornik, Nina Erak, Mato Ergović, Lidija Florijan, Emil Glad, Ivo

Gregurevic, Goran Grgic, Nives Ivankovic, Darko Janes, Vjekoslav Janković, Zdenko Jelcic,

Ivan Joncic, Jasna Jukic, rpimir Jurkic, Ljubo Kapor, Marija Kohn, Adam Koncic, Bozidar

Koscak, Niko Kovac, Franjo Kuhar, Drazen Kuhn, Niksa Kuselj, Danko Ljustina, Mirjana

Majurec, Slavica Maras-Mikulandra, omislav Martic, Ante-Cedo Martinic, Mise Marti-

novic, Maro Martinovic, Perica Marinovic, Damir Mejovsek, Igor Mesin, Boris Miholjevic,

Darko Milas, Helena Minic, Vedran Mlikota, Suzana Nikolic, Mia Oremovic, Frane Persin,

Sinisa Popovic, Zarko Potocnjak, Ksenija Prohaska, Ivica Pucar, Nada Rocco, Sinisa Ru-

zic, Davor Svedruzic, Boris Svrtan, Alen Salinovic, Krunoslav Saric, Josko Sevo, Glorija

Soletic, Milan Strljic, Zvonko orjanac, Romina Vitasovic, Zlatko Vitez, Edo Vujic, Mladen

Vulic, Ivica Zadro, Mirta Zecevic, Zvonimir Zoricic, Jozo Zovko, Vladimir Geric, Branko

Ivanda, Josko Juvancic, Lawrence Kiiru, Vlatko Perković and Zeljko Senecic.

Nomina sunt odiosa, but none of these names found their way onto any indictment that

sought to prosecute those who had participated in “a joint criminal enterprise, the common

purpose of which was the forcible and permanent removal of the Serbian population from

the Krajina region, including by plunder, damaging or complete destruction of the property

of the Serbian population, in order to discourage or prevent the return and re-settlement of

Theatre should be asocial, ethical and

artistic act that has

the courage to call a

crime by its name.


13/40


11

members of that population in their homes.” For, whether it is about General Gotovina or

anyone else - a crime remains a crime, and Croatian actors and theater professionals should

finally realize that the ethnicity of the victim or the aggressor ought not to be a criterion of

remembering or forgetting.

And until that happens, there is Te Croatian Teatre, which is equally hated by actors and theatreprofessionals and defenders, and by the Catholic Church and most of the Croatian public. Such

a broad coalition of haters already shows the power of theatre which, if only it wanted to retain a

minimum of moral honesty for itself and the society it represents, would become a privileged place

of the memories that all other institutions are in the business of erasing.

Te author is a theatre director from Croatia

Pjer Zalica

Photo: Radiosarajevo.ba

In and by his films, this director fought against the war of which he himself was a prisoner. is

is how some of the most significant creations, on life in besieged Sarajevo and the war in Bosnia

and Herzegovina, including a documentary, filmed during the war, Children as any other , were

created. He has also made two feature films, Fuse and Days and Hours. Pjer Zalica is one of the

most famous directors in the region and Dean of the Academy of Performing Arts in Sarajevo.

Even when you are dealing with the most difficult issues, such as war and the break-up of Yugoslavia, it seems that you’re focused on finding the positive and the good inpeople. How do you make that happen and why is that important to you?

Emotion is a force. Often a terrible, destructive force that can dissolve us. At the same time,

sometimes, only emotion can save us, warn us forcefully that something is wrong, or make

us feel that something is just right. Emotion often comes before logical or analytical insights,

!We’veConcealedToo Many

Dark Secrets

INTERVIEW


14/40


12

preceding or justifying it. In addition, emotions are what we all have in common, and they are

not dependent on cultural, geographical, theological or any other assumptions. Some people

are emotionally disabled and can’t feel or sympathize, but that, in itself, belongs to the realm of

psychopathy. However we can safely say: we all feel justice or injustice, love or anger, hatred or

passion. erefore, when telling stories of emotion, feeling is what I center on. I believe that is

the central and the strongest point for universal communication. As for the focus for good in

difficult circumstances, there is no mystery there: no times or circumstances are so bad as to

make one incapable of distinguishing between what is basically good and what is basically evil.

If someone claims that to be the case, he is simply looking for an excuse for the bad things he

has done. ere can be no justification for such things. To understand,

to forgive, that’s fine, but to justify—it is not. And as to how it is that I

succeed in anything—I really have no idea. I’m trying, I guess.

Tere is a growing number of films and theater performances dealing with things

that ‘official’ history remains silent about. Does the public recognize and respond toartworks and to artists’ messages? Can art change official narratives?

Art has always at least partially dealt with what has been glossed over. I don’t think that is

exclusively the prerogative of our times. Art has always focused on the forbidden. Maybe

we’ve swept too many things under the rug, concealed too many dark things. Maybe we have

been skillfully pretending that they had not happened, or we have called them something else,

totally inappropriate names. Maybe now, they are catching up with us, popping up like the

devil, like a jack-in-the-box, more than we would usually expect. Some people welcome expos-

ing those dark secrets, others not at all. ose who encourage such processes are usually in a

minority. And they are not just artists. e media, science, history, first-hand witnesses, manyof them are doing something courageous and the only right thing – facing the truth. On the

other side are all those who want to weaken the process or, if possible, to make it disappear.

Among those forces there are many artists. ey too make movies, write books, draw, com-

pose, take part in theatrical performances... It is simply a struggle of two concepts: truth and

good, versus evil and lies. Sounds a bit like a fairytale. And it is. Because divisions are not so

surgically clean. I don’t believe that there are absolutely correct people, immune to mistakes,

nor do I believe in completely bad people. I don’t believe that some are as good as angels, and

everything they say and do is right, while the latter are purely wrong and evil. I doubt that. But

this doubt doesn’t discourage me – on the contrary, I think it’s all the more reason to be con-

stantly trying to do the right thing, with the awareness that we possibly make mistakes. I do

not believe that anyone will emerge as a winner from that process.

What was it like to make films during the war in Sarajevo?

It was a horrible experience from which I, unfortunately, profited artistically. Needless to

say, I’d give up on that ‘acquisition’ quite happily if only I could bring back even one life lost

in vain in that hellish siege. It was abnormal. It is not normal to be held captive, under siege,

even though you haven’t done anything. It is not normal to have someone constantly try to

To understand, to for-

give, that’s fine,

but to justify — it is not.


15/40


13

kill you by any means possible. It is not quite normal that in such circumstances you still have

a need to live, to feel, and to create... We were all like one happy family in hell. Incompre-

hensible. While filming a documentary about children in the war, I asked a boy who loved to

sing to sing about how it felt for him to be in a war. Improvising, he sang this verse: “It was

cheerful, it was horrible.” It was horrible, but we refused to admit it.

From time to time I come across a statement that claims the siege

of Sarajevo never even happened. at it was made up. I feel sorry

for the people who are willing to stoop so low, but I am also terri-

fied knowing how many people are willing to believe these miserable

souls. Which brings us back to your previous question.

In your most popular film, which deals with one of the greatest Yugoslav bands, PlaviOrkestar , you raise the issues of politics, the system and nationalism. Have you ever feltpressured, by yourself or by others, because of that approach to art?

I’m not an activist to be honest. I see myself as a bass guitarist who directs movies. I do not reallychoose ‘dangerous’ topics. e media, for example, have often labeled me as someone who deals

with irrelevant topics. For years I have been trying to make a comedy, but in vain. I start well, and

then, because I deal seriously with my material, I don’t have the nerve to bypass the things I think

are important. And so the comedy goes down the drain. But some humor survives, and I’m quite

happy that it does. However, after each film there have been some unpleasant reactions. Fuse, for

example, was characterized as an anti-Serb, anti-Croat and anti-Bosniak movie. One critic ar-

gued that Fuse was anti-Bosniak because in no frame in the film could you see a mosque. I didn’t

find that nonsensical attack unusual. What was unusual to me was actually my first reaction – I

thought, “Impossible, how could I have made can a film in Teasanj, and not show a mosque...” So, you start following the pattern of idiocy, albeit unconsciously. I try to protect myself from that

pattern as much as possible. Although you claim that you don’t feel the pressure, that there is

no self-censorship, it is still there somewhere, crouching, waiting, and always ‘doing’ something

there. As long as it is unconscious, it’s ok. But when it becomes conscious, then it’s over, you

should change your job, go into politics, because there it is an advantage.

What is your opinion of RECOM? From the perspective of an artist, how important isit to determine the names of all the victims?

An artist’s perspective is not specific to this issue, or at least it shouldn’t be. On a human,

individual level, there is nothing more important. I personally am not looking for any par-ticular name from the war. I know whom I’ve lost. And I know how much it matters. On

the other hand, on a general level it is no less important, because it is simply a question of

respect for life. e nations in our regions all pride themselves on how honor is the first and

most important thing. So where is the problem then? e problems are numerous, because

twenty years after the war, that job is still not done.

Jelena Grujic Zindovic

Some people welcomeexposing those dark se-

crets, other are not at all.

Those who encourage

such processes are usu-

ally in a minority.


16/40


14

Zlatko Pakovic

Photo: Blic.rs

In his theater work, director, writer, critic and columnist, Zlatko Pakovic, has been dealing

with social issues for more than twenty years. His latest play, Ibsen’s Enemy of the People as

Brecht’s Didactic Piece, which premiered late last year at the Center for Cultural Decontami-

nation (CCD), is certainly one of the most engaged and most significant plays performed in

Serbia in recent years.

Te performance was preceded by an unusual procedure – workshops with the public

across Serbia. ell us more about them.

Once we had sketched-out this play with the composer and the two actors, we started to

perform the outline in different cities and towns. After each performance, we talked with

the audience. We organized it as part of a CCD project called Studies of Context .

In Nis, we performed for young children, between ten and twelve years

old, mostly Roma, very neglected by society and by their own city. We

performed in Novi Pazar, also in a mixed ethnic environment, for an au-

dience of high school students and the elderly. en in Uzice, for a group of outstanding teach-

ers of literature and their students, whom these teachers guide and teach in a very originalway. en we performed in Subotica. We went to different parts of Serbia, both geographically

and ethnically, and performed for audiences of different ages and from different social back-

grounds. We recorded these conversations with the audience. eir questions were important

to us and served as a kind of roadmap for our further work. en we brought that material

together for a play that had its premiere on December 20th last year.

How did the audience react? What did they take to be universal and what was specific?

!The Need

for Complete Social Overhaul is Huge

I support RECOM

in every respect.


17/40


15

e unanimous reaction was total immersion in what they were watching and this to us was

very important. Indeed, when we present people with something that we ourselves believe

and that we are sincerely interested in, in artistic and political terms, then they responded

with sincere interest. For me as a director and a kind of a guide through this play, it was

curious how we had to adapt the segments on some important theater-related issues, andkey political issues of our society, to the age structures of our audience. When I spoke in

front of second, third, or fourth graders, I generally avoided theoretical theatrical and liter-

ature-related, terms or I used them very carefully, by finding examples suitable for children.

In contrast, in Subotica, before college students, especially those interested in becoming

professionally involved in theater, I could use those terms, and introduce the audience to

the theory of theater, I could engage them with the essence of Brecht’s theory of epic theater

which is preceded by the theory of didactic theater.

e aim of these studies of context was not only to show what we do,

but to allow the children and young people to get involved in theater

or other artistic work on their own, while applying the method we

used. is was quite interesting, because in the end it generated some

artwork, and their own plays.

ere were different reactions and questions that depended primarily on age and level of

education, as well as on existential and social conditions. ings are not the same if you live

in a Roma ghetto in Nis, as they are in an apartment in downtown Belgrade or in a house

in Subotica. It’s not the same living what is known as safe civic life, as living on the edge of

existence, where anyone can scare you off, where parents sell their own children. We sawkids who don’t have enough to eat every day.

Who is more worried about their future – those who are on the margins or those in the

center of Belgrade?

e disproportionality is really interesting here. It seems to me that those who live more

comfortably are more concerned about their lives. at’s devastating. Children born in a

ghetto and in shanty towns have limited desires, much like they are limited in what society

offers them. It is interesting that it does not affect their immediate feelings as much as it

does those who have much higher expectations. It’s tragic, it’s something that defeats you,

because you come across children who don’t believe that they are able to attend school,

among whom you see really smart kids, as smart as everywhere else. On the other hand,

those who expect much more from life are much more unhappy – some trivial things and

silly things affect them much more. On an emotional level, I had to deal with a variety of

things. If an instructor who brought the children to us, told us that the kids hadn’t eaten

anything, and if we were offering them something other than food, then we were forced to

Only when free people

join their energies,

can a genuine de-

mand for a social

change come about.


18/40


16

ask ourselves about the essence of this work we are doing. However, we must continue to

ask fundamental questions, but we also must be prepared for what is most important – the

practice of liberation, helping others and ourselves.

What do you expect from this play? Will it mobilize people, what will be its effects?

We must think first. You can’t do good without knowing what good is. Our work is focused

on that goal – to talk about what is good and to show that it is not difficult to reach that

conclusion. It’s actually the simplest of things: to expect the majority to know what is good

and what is bad. It is important to start from there. With this

play, we’ve established one major fact – that nothing feels as

good as freedom, that the greatest pleasure is when a man is

free, when he thinks, and when he creates freely, and without

obstacles. And when free people join their energies, then a

genuine demand for social change can come about. We sim-ply wanted to comb through some basic issues and feelings,

and do what Brecht and Ibsen did, which is to make a theater play not merely what we come

to watch in a theater – a kind of cry, a condemnation or lament – but a true attempt to mo-

bilise the public, at least while the show goes on. In the approach we used, everyone had to

take responsibility, because without it there is nothing. Each of us must be accountable for

our actions towards others and to ourselves, that’s the whole point.

When you apply the concept you are talking about to the war history of the region and

to the relationship our societies have with it, what emerges?

What are we actually talking about when we talk about transitional justice? at’s a very

complex issue. e question is should we focus our attention solely on the transition that

takes place within our society or the transition yet to occur, or are we perhaps talking about

the transition that ‘s been around for a long time in Europe and the world, of which we are

only one part. ere’s another issue we have to resolve, and that is the legacy bequeathed

to us by Slobodan Milosevic and his regime. e destruction we ended up with after ten,

twelve years under this regime is appalling. Remember that in the news we watched astro-

logical forecasts. It was said that the alignment of the planets was such that it favored theunification of all Serb lands. In a report from Dubrovnik, a soldier said that he was so well

trained that he could target someone’s bowl of soup in the city, but no one asked any more

about this battlefield and this soldier who aimed at civilians eating their soup. Reports from

the front lines at the time were the first reality shows. Milijana Baletic, who still works at

TV Vojvodina, used to knock, unannounced at the doors of non-Serbs, aksing them ques-

tions like “Is it true that tonight five Ustashas are spending the night at your house?” ose

were reality shows on which people’s lives and deaths hinged.

We must continue to ask funda-

mental questions, but we also

must be prepared for what is

most important – the practice

of liberation, helping others

and ourselves.


19/40


17

e extent of the destruction was so terrible that now our society literally has to have treat-

ment. We all live damaged lives, because we spent two decades under the pressure of so

many immoral things. We have been sweeping more and more things under the carpet, but

symptoms keep breaking out. Imagine someone telling you 20 years ago that Aleksandar

Vucic, the then spokesman for Vojislav Seselj, was to be the Prime Minister of the country,and Ivica Dacic, a former spokesman of Slobodan Milosevic, the Minister of Foreign Af-

fairs? We’d all have probably bought a one-way ticket, or walked away from here, forever.

But we haven’t left, and they were promoted despite all the terrible things they’d done. And

then you ask – what do the public think? To make things even more complex, what they

were offered during the elections instead of Vucic and Dacic wasn’t much better or was no

better at all, than those two, and in some respects was even worse. e previous govern-

ment masterfully prepared the way for this one. ings are terrible, and how are we to get

out of it, I don't really know. But if we start to think and if we refuse to accept the errors

in logic not only with regards to thinking but also with regards to our own lives, then thechange has already begun. If we start from there, we will have guidelines about how to deal

with other matters.

It is very important to keep this in mind as well: our time is running out. Various political

figures keep lining up, but time slips away. None of us would be against it, if these people,

who now lead this country, such as they are, with their moral and social profiles, did some-

thing good. I really want this government, under the man I still can’t believe is in office, to be

the best of all governments so far, better than the government of Zoran Djindjic, because

we do not have much time left. Twenty something excellent years went by in a time-vacuum,

and through a terrible re-patriarchalization and balkanization of society. As Zoran Djindjic

used to say, if a war criminal can do something good for once, let him do it. But that does

not mean that he should be pardoned, as war crimes have no statute of limitation.

At the same time, we must begin to form opposition – the opposition to this system of values.

A growing number of artworks are engaging with the process of dealing with the war

past. Do you believe that art can initiate or accelerate this process in our region?

I believe in the power of art that is indiginous and totally specific, and that belongs only to

the arts. Art, when it is true art, creates a new form, a new form that is a new mode of as-

sociation and cooperation between people. A work of art is great and serious when the artist

manages to create a new form. Only a new form can bring new meaning.

ere are shiny, interesting, heavy, stormy artistic performances, but they lack a new form,

because the artists and the people working on them do not bother to come up with a new

form. Instead, they apply trite, worn-out forms, but the essence of creation is absent, and the

artist is part of mass reproduction. In this way, art lags behind life.


20/40


18

Only when a new form is found – and (I’ll say it without any modesty) I think our play,

through which we found a new form of communication within the artwork and with the

audience does that, only then do glimmers of light slowly shine through toward a possibility

of social change.

Indeed, some serious artists, especially in the world of theater, have emerged in the region.

Rados Urban is one such artist in our country, and Oliver Frljic is an exceptional personality,

who works throughout the region and accompanying these two artists, there are many others.

ere are also some others about whom there is a lot of talk, who get awards and such, but in

fact do nothing but loudly, and in an attractive way, apply old, worn out forms. Critics should

jump in there and say a word or two. But critique is on a downward slope here, not only when

it comes to theater, but also when it comes to social criticism. ose who criticize our govern-

ment, our political habits, use, actually, old forms of criticism.

People actually have to start to think. Chomsky puts it nicely: If I still think and teach stu-dents what I taught five years ago, then either there is something wrong with the class I’m

teaching or with me. is should be taken seriously. If someone has been doing the same

thing for twenty years, putting the same play on, only maybe with a different content, then

he really is not doing anything – time has stopped there, just like it has stopped in our soci-

ety. is is the essence of our defeat. e essence of art, therefore, is to introduce new form,

which then introduces new meaning, and in this way produces social change.

Do you support the Initiative for RECOM?

One of the most important things is to record the names of all of the victims, to finally knowwho, where, when and by whom someone was killed, and who was responsible for those

deaths. is is one of the things being done. I think that it is also very important that every-

one in the region begins to communicate with everyone else. And that is the essence of this

project – the fact that it takes place on the territory of the former Yugoslavia, among the

parties that were once at war. In short, I support it in every respect. I see a lot of resistance,

and we need to discover the reason for it. Resistance comes from different sources, and as

far as I know, it comes from the non-governmental sector as well, which is quite appalling.

Jelena Grujic Zindovic


21/40


19

e Presidential Envoys for RECOM3 ended their mandate on October 29, 2014. In one year– and in consultation with the presidents, including those members of the Presidency ofBosnia and Herzegovina (B&H) who had delegated envoys – they had jointly compiled theChanges to the RECOM Statute which, in their opinion, represent the legal and constitu-tional options for the establishment of RECOM.

The Seventh Assembly of the Coalition for RECM

In accordance with the rules of the Coalition for RECOM, the Coalition Assembly resolved tosupport the Changes to the RECOM Statute, which it had originally adopted on March 26, 2011.

On November 14, 2014, the Coalition held its Seventh Assembly, this time in Belgrade (Serbia),with 104 delegates, representing 1950 members, taking part in it. With one vote against and twoabstentions, the delegates supported the Changes to the RECOM Statute, compiled by theenvoys of the Presidents of Montenegro, Serbia, Croatia and Kosovo, and the Bosniak and Croa-tian members of the Presidency of B&H,4 in conjunction with the task of examining the constitu-tional and legal options for the establishment of RECOM in each country.

In an extensive debate, the delegates stated that the Changes “preserve the very essence ofthe Draft Statute, that the removal of RECOM’s punitive powers removes any suggestionthat RECOM assumes a judicial authority, and that the procedure for the nomination and

election of members of selection committees and members of the Commission has beenconsiderably simplified.” On behalf of the Coalition for RECOM, the delegates stronglywelcomed the changes in the funding of the Commission, which envisage that RECOM be

3 Prof. Zlata Djurdjevic, envoy of the President of Croatia; Prof. Sonja omovic Sundic, envoy of the President of Mon-tenegro; Legal Advisor Selim Selimi, envoy of the President of Kosovo; Deputy Mayor of Sarajevo, Aljosa Campara,envoy of the member of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina; ICTY liaison officer, Goran Mihaljevic, envoy ofthe member of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina; and Judge Sinisa Vazic, envoy of the President of Serbia.

4 e President of Macedonia, Gjorge Ivanov , informed the Coaltion for RECOM that he would support the decisionon the establishment of RECOM if the presidents and members of the BH Presidency reach a consensus.

!Report on

the RECOM Process:October–December2014

IN THE NEWS – NEWS ABOUT RECOM


22/40


20

funded by domestic and foreign donations, as well as by international organizations, ratherthan through contributions from states, as the Coalition initially proposed.

Delegates especially welcomed the Envoys’ position that the objectives of the Commissionshould include “the promotion of educational programmes in accordance with the facts

established by the Commission.”When informing the public on its support for the Changes to the Statute,5 the Coalitionnoted that the Envoys and Presidents and Members of the B&H Presidency reached completeagreement on the Commission’s task of establishing the facts about war crimes and otherhuman rights violations committed during the period from January 1, 1991 through the endof December 2001. e Coalition indicated that two opinions were expressed with regard toRECOM’s task of “exploring the political and social circumstances that decisively contributedto the outbreak of the wars, and to the commission of war crimes and other violations of hu-man rights”: “it is crucial that RECOM investigate the causes of the war” and “investigating thecauses of the war is possible only after the facts about war crimes have been established.” Both

opinions are in full accordance with the Coalition’s Proposal of the Statute of RECOM.

!The Letter to Presidents/Members of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina

On December 10, 2012, the Coalition for RECOM sent a letter to the Presidents and Membersof the B&H Presidency, reminding them that the Assembly had endorsed the Changes to theRECOM Statute, whereby the conditions were created for a new step towards the establishmentof the Regional Commission for establishing the facts about war crimes and other serious viola-tions of human rights in the wars in the former Yugoslavia (RECOM). In this letter, the Coalitionsubmitted that it expected the Presidents/Members of the B&H Presidency to reach an agree-ment on the ways in which they would inform the public and their respective Parliaments on the

decision to jointly support the establishment of the Commission. e Coalition invited the Presi-dents/Members of the B&H Presidency to be attentive to the proposal by the President of theCroatia that all of them, within the agreed deadline, send an open letter to the public and theirParliaments concerning their joint support for the establishment of RECOM.

On the same occasion, the Coalition informed the Presidents/Members of the B&H Presi-dency that in the meantime it had made significant progress in documenting human losses,camps and other detention facilities in the wars of the 1990s.

On the International Day of Human Rights, the Humanitarian Law Center (HLC) from Serbiaand the Humanitarian Law Center Kosovo (HLCK) set up on the website of the Kosovo Memory

Book the Register of killed and missing persons in connection with the war in Kosovo in theperiod from January 1, 1998 until December 31, 2000. e Register contains 13,517 war victims,whose deaths or disappearances in connection with the war is confirmed by 27,511 documents.

For three years the Center for Dealing with the Past – Documenta, from Croatia, and the HLChave been jointly conducting empirical research on victims who lost their lives or went miss-ing during the war in Croatia, by taking statements from witnesses and family members.

5 Te Coalition for RECOM Supports the Changes to the RECOM Statute, press release, November 17, 2014.


23/40


21

In late 2013, the Association for Transitional Justice, Accountability and Remembrancein B&H (TJAR) and the Center for Democracy and Transitional Justice (CDTP) launcheda joint project, “Mapping camps and other detention facilities in B&H,” which directlycontributes to fulfilling the part of RECOM’s mandate that refers to compiling the list ofof the places of confinement connected to the war and individuals who were unlawfully

confined and tortured.

Te current “standstill”

Given that the new Presidency was elected in B&H6 after the Envoys, in consultation withthe Presidents and Members of the BH Presidency, had drafted and adopted the Changes tothe RECOM Statute, the Coalition is obliged to consult with the new Members of the Presi-dency: the Croatian Member Dragan Covic, and the Serbian Member Mladen Ivanic.7 Alsocontributing to the current “standstill” of the RECOM process were the presidential elec-tions in Croatia,8 held on January 11, 2015.

If the year 2015 sees the kind of political support RECOM enjoyed in 2014, prospects willbe solid for post-Yugoslav countries to begin constructing – for the first time in the historyof post-conflict societies, independently, and with no external conditions and pressure fromthe international community – a regional mechanism for dealing with the past that has thepotential to eliminate the deficiencies of criminal justice as well as to remove the politicalobstacles to finding the remaining mass graves, establishing the facts about all war crimes,and ensuring respect for the experiences of others and their dignity.

!The Tenth Forum for TransitionalJustice in Post-Yugoslav Countries

“Te only unit of measurement is today’s rallyof Radicals here in Belgrade. I’m asking younow: Who are the winners? Just imagine thesituation ten years ago – would it have been possible for us to talk in this room whilethey protested outside? Tere would have been an unnaturally disproportionate exer-cise of power, violence and might against a group of people who believe in basic human

values. oday we are here, and although some have lost a lot, especially their lovedones, our system of values triumphs over those losers protesting in the square.”9

e Tenth Forum was dedicated to the achievements of transitional justice, the promotion

of the use of facts in works of art, and listening to the voices of the victims. e Forum was

6 e Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina was formed on November 17, 2014.7 e Serbian Member of the BH Presidency, Nebojsa Radmanovic, did not participate in the process of RECOM.8 e second round of presidential elections is to be held on January 11, 2015.9 Branislav Radulovic, a lawyer from Montenegro, member of the Coalition for RECOM.


24/40


22

held on November 15 and 16, 2014 in Belgrade, and it was organized by the Coalition for

RECOM. e Forum was attended by 158 members of the Coalition for RECOM and 150

representatives of civil society organizations, artists, writers, academic researchers of transi-

tional justice, journalists and other professionals or activists dealing with transitional justice

in post-Yugoslav countries. At the Forum, twelve panelists talked about the achievements

in the field of transitional justice from the perspective of civil society and academia; sixteen

panelists discussed the use of facts in works of art; and twelve victims spoke about their per-

sonal experiences in the war and about the search for the mortal remains of their loved ones.

e Forum was opened by Natasa Kandic, Project Coordinator of RECOM, and by Profes-sor Zdravko Grebo, the Public Advocate of the Initiative for RECOM. In their key-noteaddresses, they announced a new phase of the RECOM process, in which the Coalition will

monitor, help and encourage state institutions to establish RECOM. ey invited the mem-

bers of the Coalition to prepare for new activities and reminded everyone of the rapidity

with which changes take place in the Balkans.

Professor Grebo said: “When it comes to civil society and the non-governmental sector, we

have completed our mission. Of course, I myself will not let anyone use our achievement

unchecked and solely according to their own ideas. We have reached a momentum when the

Heads of States, through their Envoys, should take the matter into their own hands, because

we cannot, even if we wanted to, complete the task ahead of us on our own.”

Panel I: Achievements and Priorities in Criminal Justice – the Civil Society Perspective

Criminal justice for the crimes committed during the wars of the 1990s in the former Yu-

goslavia has not yet come close to achieving its objectives. In all countries of the region, the

disproportion between the crimes committed and the crimes prosecuted continues to standout. At the same time, there is not a single proceeding before national courts that honestly

and objectively discloses the role of the state in organizing and carrying out the crimes, or

that prosecutes top officials, the masterminds of the crimes. Of particular concern is that

a strong political influence on the judiciary is still obvious in all countries. is influence

is manifested in different ways, but the most obvious one is the obstruction of war crimes

trials. e panelists and participants in the debate concluded that the number of court pro-

ceedings steadily declines every year.

ea Gorjanc Prelevic, from the Human Rights Action organization, said that, despite the

European Commission’s recommendation that the practice of impunity for war crimes beterminated, the authorities in Montenegro act as though the prosecution of war crimes

is pretty much completed. “e lack of will, obvious on all levels, to punish war crimes in

Montenegro is a logical consequence of the fact that the current Prime Minister of Monte-

negro assumed the same position at the time when the crimes were committed. For a justice

system that strives to join Europe, this very fact should be an incentive to demonstrate inde-

pendence and a willingness to understand and deal with the crimes from the past. And al-

though it is clear that Montenegro does not have such a judiciary in place, it is by now quite


25/40


23

clear that the European Union insists on such a judiciary in order to accept Montenegro. 10

So, in the end, some hope still remains,” said Gorjanc Prelevic.

Vesna erselic, Head of Documenta, made a similar remark on the attitude of the authorities

towards the prosecution of war crimes in Croatia. “In Croatia,” she said, “the State Attorney’s

Office has been entrusted with dealing with those who in the 1990s participated in covering upthe crimes. It was reasonable to expect that in the new political circum-

stances some professionals would take advantage of the opportunity for

better work, but this has inevitably meant that the continuation of inter-

rupted procedures has been entrusted to those individuals who, out of

sheer political opportunism, have deliberately ‘forgotten’ about them, so

as not to jeopardize their position or promotion in the police structures

or the State Attorney’s office,” said Terselic.

In Serbia, criminal justice for war crimes has had modest results “compared to the scale and

character of the crimes committed during the wars in the former Yugoslavia, despite a solidlegal and institutional framework,” said Sandra Orlovic, Humanitarian Law Center execu-

tive director. With regard to the system of protection and support during war crimes trials,

first the victims and then the witnesses bear the worst consequences of the irresponsible ac-

tions of institutions. “One of the reasons for such modest achievements in the field of pros-

ecuting those responsible for war crimes is the fact that Serbia, unlike B&H and Croatia,

lacks a Strategy for War Crimes Prosecution. In this regard, the adoption (and application)

of a Strategy, which would bind all relevant institutions to assume greater responsibility and

undertake specific tasks to improve the prosecution of war crimes in the near future, is im-

perative,” said Orlovic.Of all the countries in the region, B&H conducts the largest number of war crimes trials.

Such a vast judicial apparatus was supposed to be an adequate response to the fact that the

largest number of crimes was committed in B&H and that B&H has most victims. Dzenana

Karup Drusko, from the TJAR, drew attention to the state’s failure to implement the Na-

tional Strategy for War Crimes Prosecution adopted in 2008. e Strategy envisaged that all

proceedings of complex cases be completed by 2015, and the rest by 2023. “It is quite clear

that these deadlines will not be met,” she concluded.

In B&H too – which carries the heaviest burden of war legacy – the judiciary faces political

obstruction, despite the fact that the country’s status is still one of an international protectorate.is was the conclusion by the European Commission in its report on Bosnia and Herzegovina’s

progress in 2014. is is particularly evident with regard to agreements with other countries in

the region, which, among other things, are designed to allow the extradition of nationals sus-

10 ”ere have been no serious efforts to combat impunity for war crimes. [...] Montenegro must step up its efforts tocombat impunity and to effectively investigate, prosecute, and punish war crimes in accordance with internationalstandards.” Report of the European Commission on the Progress of Montenegro in 2014, as quoted by Tea GorjancPrelevic.

We have reached a

momentum when

the Heads of States,

through their Envoys,

should take the matter

into their own hands.


26/40


24

pected or convicted of war crimes. Dzenana Karup Drusko spoke about that as well: “No small

number of persons against whom Bosnia and Herzegovina is conducting criminal prosecution,

including those who have been legally adjudicated, find their refuge in Serbia, Montenegro or

Croatia, through dual citizenship. In addition, the agreements Bosnia and Herzegovina signed

with Serbia, Croatia and Montenegro on the execution of criminal sanctions are not being re-

spected (e.g. the cases of final judgment against Momir Savic, Bosko Lukic, Velibor Bogdanovic,

Mirko Todorovic). Most of the unresolved interstate issues on the prosecution of criminals have

been resolved politically, by signing protocols and agreements, but those have not solved the

fundamental problems,” noted Dzenana Karup Drusko.

In contrast to B&H, Kosovo has a very limited local capacity to prosecute war crimes. For sev-

eral years now, EULEX has been narrowing its mission and transferring responsibilities to the

Kosovo authorities. “e question is how will the Kosovo institutions cope with their greater

obligations to the victims of the war in general, and specifically to missing persons. Generally

speaking, sufficient political support is still lacking, and so are adequate mechanisms for the col-lection of relevant information for the investigation of war crimes and missing persons. Witness

intimidation is still a worrying problem, even though the police have made significant progress

by establishing the Directorate of Witness Protection,” said Nora Ahmetaj from the Center for

Documentation, Research and Publication. She urged the NGOs and the Coalition for RECOM

to encourage the European Commission to develop a strategy of transitional justice in post-con-

flict societies which would replace the obligation of “cooperation with the ICTY” – an obligation

that has been seen as an instrument of transitional justice for years.

Discussing the achievements and priorities of the Hague Tribunal, Mirko Klarin pointed

out that the most valuable legacy of the Tribunal are judicial facts: the facts of what hap-pened, what the victims suffered, how it happened. “We may not have always accurately

determined who the culprits were – certainly, that’s a serious drawback. But even without

identifying the guilty persons, it is extremely important to preserve for the future the facts

that have been established, and to present them in the right way to the communities of vic-

tims - and also to the communities to which the perpetrators belong”, concluded Klarin.

RECOM Process: Professor Žarko Puhovski

“We kept on failing, time and again, we suffered rejections, we begged, they refused, they

kept saying, ‘Wait, we’ll see,’ and somehow some of them got sick of us. And that’s the current

state of affairs. It is important, however, to bear in mind that we did not reach what is calleda ‘point of no return.’ at’s the point of irreversibility. Everything can still change. We could

not choose whom to talk to, but we talked to those who, if they had good will, could do some-

thing. e question was whether we could convince them that it would be good for them to do

so. But now we come to the point when we have the clear position of the Croatian President,

shared for now by two and a half other Presidents. And that position, roughly, sounds like this:

‘e President, in consultation with the other Presidents of the post-Yugoslav states, gives to

his Parliament a statement of his support to the RECOM process, and therefore the President


27/40


25

requires that the Parliament take the steps necessary to make RECOM become what it was

intended to be from the very beginning – an interstate, i.e. a regional commission for estab-

lishing the facts about war crimes and other serious violations of human rights committed in

the territory of the former Yugoslavia.”

“And so, our great success, should it ever come about, would be to disseminate all that nasti-ness to the public of the post-Yugoslav states. But that would be a success in the sense in which

Zdravko Grebo spoke about it in his keynote address – preventing

what is now a post-Yugoslav victimology competition, as to who has

the most victims, and who then has the best strategic position for the

next conflict. is would be prevented if we succeed in the things we

have been doing. And that’s why we are in fact dealing more with the

future than with the past.”

Reparations for the Victims of Wars in the Former Yugoslavia

Igor Cvetkovski, from the International Organization for Migration, concluded that, in thepost-Yugoslav countries, reparations and the establishment of truth, the very basis of transi-

tional justice and its practice, have been ignored and swept aside.

e panel was moderated by Nenad Golcevski, Outreach Program, ICTY.

Panel II: Achievements and Priorities of Transitional Justice – Academic Perspective

Professor Svetlana Slapsak strongly advocated for a gadfly 11 ethic in contemporary Balkanpolitics and societies. As she put it, “In narratives formed by the newly created identities,

there doesn’t seem to be any room for accountability, punishment and reconciliation.

is area can be installed in our new societies only through the cooperation of activism,academia and the arts. However, the state system itself, with all its injustices that are now

becoming disclosed in impermissibly large numbers, is not the target of these demands.”

Among concrete achievements in the field of transitional justice in the Western Balkans,

Jelena Subotic, Assistant Professor at Georgia State University, singled out the creation of

an archive of documents and the introduction of the concept of “transitional justice” into

public consciousness. Subotic explained these achievements in the following way: “anks

to the activity of the ICTY and, to a lesser extent, the national courts for war crimes,

today we have many documents and much information on the human rights violations

of the 1990s, and their value is priceless. None of these documents would exist todaywithout international courts and the persistence of human rights activists in the pursuit

of international justice. While in the former Yugoslavia transitional justice might not be

so popular, nor treated with the respect it deserves (and really needs), one very important

11 One of Plato’s more successful figures – a metaphor from Te Apology (30e-31c) – when Socrates warns the Athe-nians that if they kill him, they would lose the gift that God has given them: namely, to have someone who constantlyreminds them of their problems, needling them, making them think. He compares Athenian democracy to a large andnoble, but slow and immobile horse, whom only a gadfly can move.

The reports generally

concluded that RE-

COM has become an

interstate project.


28/40


26

fact should nevertheless be noted: namely, that everyone knows by now what “transitional

justice” means. is is no small thing. Activists in the field of transitional justice have

managed to incorporate the idea of post-conflict justice and dealing with the past into the

overall national discourse. We may not like everything it has produced, but the dialogue is

still there. is is a very big difference compared to the state of transitional justice fifteen or

even ten years ago. Transitional justice is present, and this will not change.”

Jasna Dragovic Soso, Senior Lecturer at Goldsmiths, University of London, indicated that,at least in the professional literature, “truth commissions are essentially political institutions.

e truth these commissions transmit inevitably privileges one narrative of the past, thus in

fact suppressing or ignoring all other narratives. us, decisions about which narrative would

be privileged, how to define victims and perpetrators, or how to determine the cause and

responsibility for the events and crimes that any truth commission is trying to describe, are

ultimately political decisions and their significance is huge. When it comes to recognizing the

inherently political nature of truth commissions, I think it is a good starting to point precisely

to RECOM’s approach, which is primarily aimed at establishing the facts and naming individual

victims. Creating an archive of officially accepted and confirmed facts about human losses and

violations of human rights in the region, along with a narrative that focuses on the victims, is

the first step towards something I consider very important - a dialogue about the past.”

Eric Gordy , Lecturer at the University College London, said that in his opinion, which hademerged out of his research and study, “the foundation for sustaining dialogue about the past

and overcoming conflicts related to it is shared memory, built not only on established facts

but on mutual recognition and acknowledgement. Generating this is a process that requires

openness and clarity, and probably also some emotional distance from the facts and events that

are being considered.... the road away from incoherence involves free communication – not

only across the national and the symbolic realms, but also between institutions and the public.

Over the last two decades this is what has happened the least, and it is what is needed the most.”

Discussion

Jelena Subotic’s praise of the Hague Tribunal and the archive of documents generated most re-

actions. Munira Subašić, President of the Association of the Mothers of Srebrenica and Zepa,warned that “the Hague Tribunal will in the end be assessed by the victims – whether it should

get a pass or fail, regardless of who defends it and how much. Anyone can say what they want,

but we the victims have the right to say whether its mandate was good.” Simo Spasic, Presidentof the Association of Families of the Kidnapped and Murdered in Kosovo and Metohija, support-

ed Munira Subasic’s position, adding that “it is the victims who will ultimately decide whether to

give support to any court, including the International Criminal Court in e Hague.”

Amir Kulagić from Srebrenica was very critical of the President of the Hague Tribunal: “Weshall erect two walls, two commemorative pillars at the entrance to the Potocari Memorial

Center – the Pillar of Shame and the Pillar for Honourable People. Mrs. Subotic, Mr. eodor

Meron will certainly be at the top of this Pillar of Shame, whether you like it or not.”


29/40


27

We are all ready to

forgive everything

and to be humiliated

for the sake of truth.

Dragan Pjevač, a refugee from Croatia and President of the Coordination of Serbian Associa-

tions of Victims’ Families, whose mother, Boja, was killed by members of the Croatian special

police in September 1993, together with dozens of villagers from Serbian villages in Medacki

Dzep, believes that the ICTY’s acquittals have damaged the victims in both Serbia and Croatia:

“We must conclude that the ICTY’s recent acquitting judgments have sent the process of deal-

ing with the past all the way back to its beginnings, and perhaps even farther back. I have in

mind Serbia and Croatia especially. e process of dealing with the past has been stopped. I

can illustrate this with Croatian Defense Minister Ante Kotromanovic’s first comment after the

acquittal of the Croatian generals: 'Now we are as clean as a whistle.’”

Participants also offered their views on the Initiative for RECOM, often

confusing the Initiative with the future Commission.

Andjelko Kvesić, Representative of the Croatian Association of Detainees

from Bosnia and Herzegovina, commented on the achievements of the RECOM process: “I’m

not absolutely satisfied with what RECOM has done so far, and with the fact that it hasn’tmanaged to introduce the Croat population from Bosnia and Herzegovina into its activities.”

Kada Hotić from the Association for “Mothers of Srebrenica and Zepa” said: “I was happy

about RECOM at the beginning. I still think it has some results, but I am confused – what

have we defined, what will be the conclusion, and what will be submitted to the governments.”

Vesna eršelič called for patience and more energy: “More energy has still to be invested

in getting the Initiative for RECOM closer to everyone. We need to continue to explain why

it would be so important to have a commission that will further research the facts of the

crimes and of the fate of the victims and the perpetrators of these crimes. I understand thatwe are impatient, and I especially understand the impatience of all those from the associa-

tions of victims, because it’s been more than twenty years now, since 1991, and so little has

been done through trials and through all other forms of dealing with the past. A big respon-

sibility is on all of us to be successful in bringing everything we propose through this initia-

tive closer to the public in our countries.”

Kushtrim Koliqi from INTEGRA of Kosovo criticized the Inter-Ministerial Group for Deal-

ing with the Past, founded by the Prime Minister of Kosovo, because it includes representa-

tives of governmental and non-governmental as well as international institutions, but has no

representative of the victims. According to him, this is a failure of the Inter-Ministerial Group,which has a mandate to draw up a Strategy for Dealing with the Past, that is, for dealing with

the legacy of the war. And the legacy of the war is, in fact, the victims.

Branislav Radulović, a lawyer from Podgorica, said that holding the Forum on the same day

when Seselj holds his public protest is a great achievement of transitional justice: “e only

unit of measurement is today’s rally of the Radicals here in Belgrade. I’m asking you now: Who

are the winners? Just imagine the situation ten years ago – would it have been possible for

us to talk in this room while they protested outside? ere would have been an unnaturally


30/40


28

disproportionate exercise of power, violence, and might against a group of people who believe

in basic human values. Today we are here, and although some have lost a lot, especially their

loved ones, our system of values wins over those losers protesting in the square.”

Amir Kulaglić from Srebrenica: “What remains for the victims, what remains for the Srebrenica

victims after twenty years, except to talk? Our story has many goals. First, to induce empathyin those who do not see us as victims. Second, to incite the academic community, the judicial

community and civic organizations to be part of the front which will give us at least some justice.

irdly, I feel that if mother Munira or mother Kada, or any other mother doesn’t speak up about

her suffering, or that if I don’t speak about my suffering – I feel that I am betraying all those vic-

tims and that I have become an accomplice of those who killed our loved ones.”

Kulaglić added his assessment of the achievements of the RECOM process: “I am happy to see

that the victims haven’t lost confidence in the Initiative for RECOM and are ready to continue

to fight for it to become what we always wanted it to be. And that should be the message of our

meeting. Don’t be impatient. If we fail to carry this burden through to the end, our initiative willhave failed. And one more thing: let’s not get too carried away by talking about how exclusive

RECOM is. RECOM is really the only good thing in one segment of transitional justice, but how

to integrate it with other pillars of transitional justice or its mechanisms is the real question?”

Fikret Grabovica, President of the Association of the Parents of the Murdered Children of

Sarajevo, said: “RECOM is really a good idea, but the extent to which the objectives, envisaged

by the Statute, will be realized is another question. As Mr. Andjelko Kvesic has mentioned that

he is the only representative of the Croatian associations of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the ques-

tion is whether and to what extent RECOM’s tasks will be realized in the first place, if Bosnian

Croats and Bosnian Serbs and their associations are not represented appropriately. We mustput effort into including all those who will be able to respond and who will participate in the

implementation of all these tasks. Because if that doesn’t happen, I am afraid the implementa-

tion of RECOM will suffer from many shortcomings.”

Milisav Stojković, President of the Center for the Protection of Families of War Victims

from Kosovo and Metohija, raised the question of equal treatment of victims and criminals:

“Do we really need another h

RECOM Initiative Voice-No.20-2015

Documents

Transcript of RECOM Initiative Voice-No.20-2015