More than a month after Milosevic was extradited to The Hague ICTY, and the question of co-operation with The ICTY still remains open and undefined. The citizens of Serbia, occupied with everyday existence and survival, begin step by step to forget about the recent president detained in Scheweningen , while the politicians remain the ones who are certainly occupied with the question of "who will the next traveller to The Hague be" among the other four accused together with Milosevic in spring 1999. They are: the current Serbian president, Milan Milutinovic; the member of the main body of Socialist Party of Serbia (SPS), Nikola Sainovic; SPS MP Vlajko Stojiljkovic (former Serbian Interior Minister); and lastly as the columnist of Daily Danas, Jasmina Lukac, names him "forgotten" office commander of Yugoslav Army (VJ), Dragoljub Ojdanic.
In the article, written by Jasmina Lukac, published in Danas, July 28- 29, the present situation and behaviour of this four previously mentioned is described. For instance, of the four, the person in the worst situation is probably Sainovic who himself constantly rejects any kind of statements to the press and never leaves house without his bodyguard. Whereas, on the other hand Milutinovic, it is presumed, will be called as a witness, instead of being the indictee. This is due to his "good behaviour" in the period after the fall of Milosevic' s regime (as it is well known Milutinovic refused to block some decisions of the DOS coalition as Milosevic family and SPS were asking him, Milutinovic as a Serbian president was in a position to do such a thing, however he did not), the fact is that he was an ambassador in Greece until 1995, so therefore he could not have been involved in the Bosnian war, as Sainovic is presumed to be. After Milosevic was arrested he resigned from all his SPS functions, etc. (Danas, July 28- 29)
In his interview to magazine "Vreme" (No 551) Serbian Prime Minister, Zoran Djindjic, stated that Democratic Opposition of Serbia (DOS) has some time to prepare and define a concept of co-operation with The ICTY. Djindjic stated that one might say that with having Milosevic in The Hague, about 50 per cent of the obligations of Serbia, concerning the topic of extradition of the FRY citizens, have been fulfilled.He then explained that now two strategic plans are in front of DOS. The first would be that the list of FRY citizens to be extradited to the Hague finishes here, or the second that a part of those be put under the trial in FRY if that is possible and also if The ICTY accepts that...
Supporters of Milosevic and legalists
The best example on which the fractions in Serbia, FRY, formed on the different opinion about The ICTY itself and co-operation with it, is certainly the case of extradition of the former President, mister Slobodan Milosevic.First, there is a fraction that consists of relatively small number of Milosevic supporters, the majority of which come from the Socialist Party of Serbia (SPS), and Serbian Radical Party (SRS). This fraction is against any co-operation with The ICTY, their politics do not differ at all from Milosevic' s in the last 10 years. Secondly one can find a fraction, whose best representative would surely be FRY president Kostunica. To define this group, the simplest way would be just to refresh in one' s memory the statements of Kostunica, related to Milosevic' s extradition. He condemned extradition and said that it is not in accordance to the FRY Constitutional Law. People sharing this kind of opinion in Serbia, FRY are called Legalists.
Here it will be also good to cite Belgrade's famous law expert and president of the Belgrade Centre for Human Rights, Vojin Dimitrijevic. In his interview for the magazine "Reporter" (No 169, year V, July 18) he said that among Serbian citizens it is still not rare to hear that Milosevic has made Serbian people suffer the most, and therefore he must be put on trial in Yugoslavia and not somewhere else. Dimitrijevic in his interview later explains that people saying this, however right they might be in a moral way, are as well trying to avoid the fact that Milosevic committed crimes against humanity and war crimes towards other nations and that by trying to trial Milosevic here they want to escape that part of his responsibility.
The third fraction
Besides the fraction of Milosevic supporters, and fraction of legalist, there is also another fraction. To explain this one it would be best to write how executive director of Yugoslav Lawyers Committee for Human Rights commented Milosevic's extradition. It is a fact that according to FRY Constitutional Law it is not permitted to extradite FRY citizens to another foreign country. However, the Executive director of Yugoslav Lawyers` Committee for Human Rights, Dusan Ignjatovic pointed out that in the case of Mister Milosevic one could not speak of extradition, in its classical interpretation. He stated that Yugoslav Lawyers` Committee for Human Rights finds that ICTY is not the court, nor body of any foreign country, but the body established by the United Nations. It is therefore important, he added, to comprehend that it is a duty for all countries, whether they are members of the UN or not, to respect the main UN documents like for instance Universal declaration for Human Rights. Today, stressed Ignjatovic, this kind of documents are in the field of common law. Ignjatovic also commented on the atmosphere during the rule of the previous regime, by saying that there were some signs and attempts of collaboration with the ICTY during Milosevic` s reign. As an example for that he cited former commanding officer of the Yugoslav Army VJ, Momcilo Perisic who said that Milosevic ordered him to surrender to the ICTY. However Perisic refused this.Ignjatovic also reminded us that since spring 1999, from the time when ICTY charged Milosevic with war crimes on Kosovo, any kind of co-operation was stopped, by Milosevic` s regime of course. Dusan Ignjatovic concluded that Yugoslav Lawyers` Committee for Human Rights finds that it is not possible to define cases such as Milosevic`s as an extradition, but simple transfer and a sort of collaboration with the ICTY, which is the court of FRY itself.
Citizens' opinion
Finally, it would be good to mention how citizens of Serbia see The ICTY. An opinion poll conducted by the weekly NIN in July 2001, which shows that a slightly over than a third of the citizens of Serbia, about 36.5 per cent think that the Serbian government was right to have extradited Milosevic to The ICTY, whereas about 56. 5 percent find that this was not the right move. That ICTY does not enjoy the support of the majority of the Serbian citizens upholds the fact that 61 per cent of those polled do not consider this court legitimate. Only 28 per cent approves of it. One third of the polled citizens think that Milosevic will have a fair trial in The Hague, whereas on the other hand, about 58. 5 per cent think the opposite.
More than a month after Milosevic was extradited to The Hague ICTY, and the question of co-operation with The ICTY still remains open and undefined. The citizens of Serbia, occupied with everyday existence and survival, begin step by step to forget about the recent president detained in Scheweningen , while the politicians remain the ones who are certainly occupied with the question of "who will the next traveller to The Hague be" among the other four accused together with Milosevic in spring 1999. They are: the current Serbian president, Milan Milutinovic; the member of the main body of Socialist Party of Serbia (SPS), Nikola Sainovic; SPS MP Vlajko Stojiljkovic (former Serbian Interior Minister); and lastly as the columnist of Daily Danas, Jasmina Lukac, names him "forgotten" office commander of Yugoslav Army (VJ), Dragoljub Ojdanic.
In the article, written by Jasmina Lukac, published in Danas, July 28- 29, the present situation and behaviour of this four previously mentioned is described. For instance, of the four, the person in the worst situation is probably Sainovic who himself constantly rejects any kind of statements to the press and never leaves house without his bodyguard. Whereas, on the other hand Milutinovic, it is presumed, will be called as a witness, instead of being the indictee. This is due to his "good behaviour" in the period after the fall of Milosevic' s regime (as it is well known Milutinovic refused to block some decisions of the DOS coalition as Milosevic family and SPS were asking him, Milutinovic as a Serbian president was in a position to do such a thing, however he did not), the fact is that he was an ambassador in Greece until 1995, so therefore he could not have been involved in the Bosnian war, as Sainovic is presumed to be. After Milosevic was arrested he resigned from all his SPS functions, etc. (Danas, July 28- 29)
In his interview to magazine "Vreme" (No 551) Serbian Prime Minister, Zoran Djindjic, stated that Democratic Opposition of Serbia (DOS) has some time to prepare and define a concept of co-operation with The ICTY. Djindjic stated that one might say that with having Milosevic in The Hague, about 50 per cent of the obligations of Serbia, concerning the topic of extradition of the FRY citizens, have been fulfilled.He then explained that now two strategic plans are in front of DOS. The first would be that the list of FRY citizens to be extradited to the Hague finishes here, or the second that a part of those be put under the trial in FRY if that is possible and also if The ICTY accepts that...
Supporters of Milosevic and legalists
The best example on which the fractions in Serbia, FRY, formed on the different opinion about The ICTY itself and co-operation with it, is certainly the case of extradition of the former President, mister Slobodan Milosevic.First, there is a fraction that consists of relatively small number of Milosevic supporters, the majority of which come from the Socialist Party of Serbia (SPS), and Serbian Radical Party (SRS). This fraction is against any co-operation with The ICTY, their politics do not differ at all from Milosevic' s in the last 10 years. Secondly one can find a fraction, whose best representative would surely be FRY president Kostunica. To define this group, the simplest way would be just to refresh in one' s memory the statements of Kostunica, related to Milosevic' s extradition. He condemned extradition and said that it is not in accordance to the FRY Constitutional Law. People sharing this kind of opinion in Serbia, FRY are called Legalists.
Here it will be also good to cite Belgrade's famous law expert and president of the Belgrade Centre for Human Rights, Vojin Dimitrijevic. In his interview for the magazine "Reporter" (No 169, year V, July 18) he said that among Serbian citizens it is still not rare to hear that Milosevic has made Serbian people suffer the most, and therefore he must be put on trial in Yugoslavia and not somewhere else. Dimitrijevic in his interview later explains that people saying this, however right they might be in a moral way, are as well trying to avoid the fact that Milosevic committed crimes against humanity and war crimes towards other nations and that by trying to trial Milosevic here they want to escape that part of his responsibility.
The third fraction
Besides the fraction of Milosevic supporters, and fraction of legalist, there is also another fraction. To explain this one it would be best to write how executive director of Yugoslav Lawyers Committee for Human Rights commented Milosevic's extradition. It is a fact that according to FRY Constitutional Law it is not permitted to extradite FRY citizens to another foreign country. However, the Executive director of Yugoslav Lawyers` Committee for Human Rights, Dusan Ignjatovic pointed out that in the case of Mister Milosevic one could not speak of extradition, in its classical interpretation. He stated that Yugoslav Lawyers` Committee for Human Rights finds that ICTY is not the court, nor body of any foreign country, but the body established by the United Nations. It is therefore important, he added, to comprehend that it is a duty for all countries, whether they are members of the UN or not, to respect the main UN documents like for instance Universal declaration for Human Rights. Today, stressed Ignjatovic, this kind of documents are in the field of common law. Ignjatovic also commented on the atmosphere during the rule of the previous regime, by saying that there were some signs and attempts of collaboration with the ICTY during Milosevic` s reign. As an example for that he cited former commanding officer of the Yugoslav Army VJ, Momcilo Perisic who said that Milosevic ordered him to surrender to the ICTY. However Perisic refused this.Ignjatovic also reminded us that since spring 1999, from the time when ICTY charged Milosevic with war crimes on Kosovo, any kind of co-operation was stopped, by Milosevic` s regime of course. Dusan Ignjatovic concluded that Yugoslav Lawyers` Committee for Human Rights finds that it is not possible to define cases such as Milosevic`s as an extradition, but simple transfer and a sort of collaboration with the ICTY, which is the court of FRY itself.
Citizens' opinion
Finally, it would be good to mention how citizens of Serbia see The ICTY. An opinion poll conducted by the weekly NIN in July 2001, which shows that a slightly over than a third of the citizens of Serbia, about 36.5 per cent think that the Serbian government was right to have extradited Milosevic to The ICTY, whereas about 56. 5 percent find that this was not the right move. That ICTY does not enjoy the support of the majority of the Serbian citizens upholds the fact that 61 per cent of those polled do not consider this court legitimate. Only 28 per cent approves of it. One third of the polled citizens think that Milosevic will have a fair trial in The Hague, whereas on the other hand, about 58. 5 per cent think the opposite.
