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 |