|
ON PROCEEDINGS AGAINST ADMIRAL MIODRAG JOKIĆ BEFORE SO-CALLED HAGUE TRIBUNAL
Almost all domestic – as well as foreign – media inform us these days that former admiral of the Yugoslav People's Army (YPA) Miodrag Jokić pleaded guilty to six accounts of the indictment of the prosecution of the so-called Hague tribunal for "violation of the laws and custom of war" on Dubrovnik area in Yugoslavia in October 1991 for (1) murder, (2) cruel treatment, (3) attacs on civilians, (4) exessive use of force and (5) destruction of historic buildings. It is about bombardement of Dubrovnik on December 6, 1991, when 2 civilians were killed and 3 wounded. As a result of a deal with Jokic, the Prosecution abandonded all other caunts contained in the initial idictment of Febrauary 22, 2001 against him and other three officers of the YPA – Pavle Strugar, Vladimir Kovačević and Milan Zec. On his first appearence before the Tribunal on November 14, 2001, he pleaded not guilty to all 9 counts.. As a result of the deal the Prosecution wrote a new amanded indictment bearing the date of March 31, 2003.
One of the reasons that the case provokes interst in domestic and foreign media is that it is the first time that that a high officer of the YPA pleads gulty before the Hague tribual for former Yugoslavia, changing his mind.
What is in the initial idictment?
As we already mentioned, it is about the indictment of February 22, 2001, which idicts also three other officers of the YPA – Pavle Strugar, Vladimir Kovačević and Milan Zec. Reading that indictment one cannot just believe his eyes.
Namely, all four officers of the YPA are indicted for serious violations of Geneva Conventions and violations of the laws and customs of war!!
Because the prosecution was aware taht these criminal offences could be committed only in an international armed conflict, it was a conditio sine qua non to caracterize that armed conflict on the Dubrovnik area between Yugoslav legal and legitimate authorities with the Croatian secessionist ustasha paramilitaries as an armed conflict of international character!! No problem for the prosecutor: she simply characterze it as a conflict of international character. The prosecution simply wrote in the initial indictment:
"All the acts and omissions specified in this indictment took place between October 1 and December 31, 1991 on the territory of the Republic of Croatia. In all relevant periods there existed the state of international armed conflict and partial occupation". And even more explicitly in the amanded indictment (paragraph 10): "10. At all times relevant to this amended indictment, a state of armed conflict existed in Croatia. On 25 June 1991, Croatia declared its independence from the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia ("SFRY") and became independent on 8 October 1991. Up to and including 7 October 1991, this armed conflict was internal in nature. >From 8 October 1991 an international armed conflict and partial occupation existed in Croatia."!!
No proofs for such categorical statement were offered. Naturally enough, because they do not exist. Everybody who wishes to know knows that in Croatia in the relevant period of time – that is between the October 1st and December 31, 1991 – existed armed secessionist mutiny in which all Army's barracks and institutions on the territory of Croatia, including the Dubrovnik area, were attacked and that the YPA had to defend itself . It was a typical internal armed conflict, and such conflicts are regulated by the common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions 1949 and Additional Protocol II of 1977, and not by the Geneva and Hague Conventions which regulate international armed conflicts.
With regard to the above statement of the prosecutor Carla del Ponte that Croatia seceded Yugoslavia on June 25, 1991, one must point to the cynicism of such a statement. The act of Croatia, it is known, was unconstitutional and legally of no validity whatsoever. She is not stupid, and knows very well that if in her country, Switzerland, a canton adopted such a decision that all normal Swiss would laugh and that the authorities would act swiftly. She doubtlessly knows how Lincoln reacted when Southern states used unconstitutional means to secede. She surely knows how would every state react in the case of unconstitutional armed secession and how in political realm they react. What this immoral woman is telling us is: yes, every state and every nation has right to use force against armed secession, EXCEPT those damned Serbs! She knew all that and what such a behavior of the pro-ustashas HDZ (Croatian Democratic Union) especially meant for the Serbs in Croatia who were during the Second World War subject of a genocide unknown in human history for its cruelty. She only pretends to be stupid in order to satisfy her masters. Also, taking the October 8, 1991, as a date when Croatia became an independent state is utmost cynicism. In all probability, it is reference to a so-called Brioni declaration of July 7, 1991, when, under pressure, deceit and lies of European Community it was agreed that Slovenia would not press for its independence within 3 months in order to solve the problems peacefully. But, it has nothing to do with Croatia's independence.
Therefore, there is no basis to consider the conflict between YPA and ustashas paramilitaries between October 1 and December 31, 1991 as a conflict of an international character, but consider it as a typical internal, secessionist conflict. The first, naturally illegal, recognition of a new "Independent State of Croatia" came from its sponsors and masters from the West only on the January 15, 1992, and cowardly General Assembly, under the command of the USA, which, precisely at that time took it under its patronage, enrolled that secessionist entity in the UN. If there is any reason to speak about legality of diplomatic recognition of Yugoslav secessionist entities as independent states (there are numerous resolutions of the General Assembly of the UN about prohibition and non-recognition of the violent dismemberment of states!!) it could be done only after the admission of an entity into the UN. Therefore, in the case of Croatia – only after May 22, 1992.
Therefore, Miodrag Jokić agreed to accept non-existent guilt. Let us repeat: "war crimes" technically could be committed only in a conflict of an international character. In civil, internal conflict the criteria for judging whether actions of state organs which are constitutionally in charge of protecting state and citizens from internal separatists, secessionists and terrorists are different, less demanding than those when there are conflicts among states. Those situations are, as we said, covered with the common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol II, and not with the remaining provisions of the Geneva and Hague Conventions of 1907. That should be known to every law student. This is not the place to speak about those laws. Surely all that is known to Carla del Ponte, but that woman takes care only how to satisfy her masters who reward her generously for her undertakings. What is astonishing is the behavior of Miodrag Jokić, behavior which is unworthy of a high YPA officer, although former. In all probability the answer to the question how it all happened lies in the pressure to which he was subject by those political factors in the current power holders whose main aim is to submit to demands which come from abroad, whose aim is to fully submit the state and the nation to foreign interests and discredit not only its military but also the nation as a whole.
Dr Milan Tepavac,
Beograd
|
