DOCSLIB.ORG

Transitional Justice in Post-Yugoslav Countries 2006

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Transitional Justice in Post-Yugoslav Countries 2006 Transitional Justice in Post-Yugoslav Countries Transitional Justice in Post-Yugoslav Countries. 1 Report for 2006 Contents Summary...........................................................................................................................................5 War Crime Trials ........................................................................................................... 5 Fact Finding ..................................................................................................................... 6 Lustration ......................................................................................................................... 7 Reparations ...................................................................................................................... 7 I..War.Crimes.Trials.......................................................................................................................8 Croatia.....................................................................................................................................8 Amnesty .......................................................................................................................... 11 Bosnia.and.Herzegovina................................................................................................... .11 Trials before Local Courts .......................................................................................... 12 Trials before the War Crimes Chamber of the BiH Court ................................. 13 Serbia................................................................................................................................... .14 Serbia’s Lack of Co-operation with the Hague Tribunal .................................... 15 Kosovo................................................................................................................................. .16 Montenegro........................................................................................................................ .17 Regional.Co-operation..................................................................................................... .18 II..“Lustration”............................................................................................................................. .19 Bosnia.and.Herzegovina................................................................................................... .19 Serbia................................................................................................................................... .20 Kosovo................................................................................................................................. .21 Croatia................................................................................................................................. .22 III..Mechanisms.of.Fact.Finding.............................................................................................. .22 Truth.Commissions............................................................................................................... .22 Bosnia.and.Herzegovina................................................................................................... .23 Truth Commission of Bosnia and Herzegovina ................................................... 23 Sarajevo Commission ................................................................................................. 24 Initiatives.for.Establishing.Truth.Commissions.on.Regional.Level........................ .25 Establishing.the.Fate.of.the.Missing.Persons.................................................................... .26 Bosnia.and.Herzegovina................................................................................................... .27 Not Applying the State Law on Missing Persons .................................................. 28 Decisions by the Human Rights Chamber/Human Rights Commission ........ 29 Croatia................................................................................................................................. .29 Big Discrepancies in the Data of the Croatian Office for the Missing Persons and associations of Serbs ................................................ 30 Discontent of the Families Because of the Delay in Exhumations and Identifications ....................................................................................................... 31 Kosovo................................................................................................................................. .32 Serbia................................................................................................................................... .33 Montenegro........................................................................................................................ .33 The.Role.of.International.Organizations...................................................................... .33 Parliamentary.Debates.on.War.Crimes............................................................................. .34 Serbia................................................................................................................................... .34 Croatia................................................................................................................................. .37 Bosnia.and.Herzegovina................................................................................................... .40 Unofficial.Initiatives.for.Fact-Finding................................................................................ .41 Research and Documentation Center and Humanitarian Law Center – Victims’ Listing ...................................................... 42 OMPF – Oral History in Kosovo .............................................................................. 42 Documenta – Oral History on Pakrac and Lipik (Croatia) .............................. 42 Scholars’ Initiative ........................................................................................................ 42 IV..Reparations............................................................................................................................ .43 Reparations.on.the.Basis.of.Statute.................................................................................... .44 Croatia................................................................................................................................. .44 The Rights of War Invalids ......................................................................................... 44 Family Disability Pensions ......................................................................................... 45 Social Aid (opskrbnina) .............................................................................................. 46 Bosnia.and.Herzegovina................................................................................................... .46 Federation BiH .............................................................................................................. 46 Republika Srpska .......................................................................................................... 47 State Level ...................................................................................................................... 49 Serbia................................................................................................................................... .50 The Rights of War Invalids ......................................................................................... 51 Family Disability Allowances and Monthly Income............................................ 52 The Rights of Families of Missing Persons ............................................................... 52 Kosovo................................................................................................................................. .53 Rights of the Families of the Missing ........................................................................ 55 Montenegro........................................................................................................................ .55 Personal War Disability Pensions (Military and Civilian) ................................ 55 4 Family Disability Pensions for Family Members of Servicemen Killed in Combat ............................................................................... 56 Reparations.Based.on.Court.Decisions............................................................................. .56 Bosnia.and.Herzegovina................................................................................................... .56 Human Rights Chamber and Human Rights Commission ................................ 57 Serbia................................................................................................................................... .58 Croatia................................................................................................................................. .60 Montenegro........................................................................................................................ .61 Kosovo................................................................................................................................. .62 Reparations.between.States.................................................................................................. .63 Return.and.Reconstruction.of.Property...........................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Updates from the International Criminal Courts Anna Katherine Drake American University Washington College of Law
    Human Rights Brief Volume 15 | Issue 3 Article 8 2008 Updates from the International Criminal Courts Anna Katherine Drake American University Washington College of Law Rachel Katzman American University Washington College of Law Katherine Cleary American University Washington College of Law Solomon Shinerock American University Washington College of Law Howard Shneider American University Washington College of Law Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/hrbrief Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Human Rights Law Commons, and the International Law Commons Recommended Citation Drake, Anna Katherine, Rachel Katzman, Katherine Cleary, Solomon Shinerock, and Howard Shneider. "Updates from the International Criminal Courts." Human Rights Brief 15, no. 3 (2008): 42-48. This Column is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington College of Law Journals & Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Human Rights Brief by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Drake et al.: Updates from the International Criminal Courts UPDATES FROM THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURTS INTERNAT I ONAL CR I M I NAL on fleeing civilians. Some individuals were der, torture, rape, and cruel treatment. At TR I BUNAL FOR THE FORMER shot execution style and others murdered in the time the crimes allegedly took place, YUGOSLAV I A front of their families. The troops opened between March and September 1998, Hara- fire on groups of civilians and burned dinaj was commander of the KLA troops in TR I AL OF ANTE GOTOV I NA others alive.
    [Show full text]
  • Case 1:10-Cv-05197 Document 1 Filed 08/17/10 Page 1 of 40
    Case 1:10-cv-05197 Document 1 Filed 08/17/10 Page 1 of 40 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION GENOCIDE VICTIMS ) OF KRAJINA, ) ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) Case No.: 1:10-CV- _____ ) L-3 COMMUNICATIONS ) Corp. and ) MPRI, Inc., ) JURY DEMAND ) Class Action ) Defendants. ) ) COMPLAINT Plaintiffs Genocide Victims of Krajina, including Milena Jovic and Zivka Mijic, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, for their Complaint against Defendants L-3 Communications Corp. (“L-3”) and MPRI, Inc. (“MPRI”), allege the following: Nature of the Action 1. This is a class action brought by ethnic Serbs who resided in the Krajina region of Croatia up to August 1995 and who then became victims of the Croatian military assault known as Operation Storm—an aggressive, systematic military attack and bombardment on a demilitarized civilian population that had been placed under the protection of the United Nations. Operation Storm was designed to kill or forcibly expel the ethnic Serbian residents of the Krajina region -1- Case 1:10-cv-05197 Document 1 Filed 08/17/10 Page 2 of 40 from Croatian territory, just because they were a minority religio-ethnic group. Defendant MPRI, a private military contractor subsequently acquired by Defendant L-3 Communications Inc., trained and equipped the Croatian military for Operation Storm and designed the Operation Storm battle plan. Operation Storm became the largest land offensive in Europe since World War II and resulted in the murder and inhumane treatment of thousands of ethnic Serbs, the forced displacement of approximately 200,000 ethnic Serbs from their ancestral homes in Croatian territory, and the pillaging and destruction of hundreds of millions of dollars worth of Serbian-owned property.
    [Show full text]
  • Framing Croatia's Politics of Memory and Identity
    Workshop: War and Identity in the Balkans and the Middle East WORKING PAPER WORKSHOP: War and Identity in the Balkans and the Middle East WORKING PAPER Author: Taylor A. McConnell, School of Social and Political Science, University of Edinburgh Title: “KRVatska”, “Branitelji”, “Žrtve”: (Re-)framing Croatia’s politics of memory and identity Date: 3 April 2018 Workshop: War and Identity in the Balkans and the Middle East WORKING PAPER “KRVatska”, “Branitelji”, “Žrtve”: (Re-)framing Croatia’s politics of memory and identity Taylor McConnell, School of Social and Political Science, University of Edinburgh Web: taylormcconnell.com | Twitter: @TMcConnell_SSPS | E-mail: [email protected] Abstract This paper explores the development of Croatian memory politics and the construction of a new Croatian identity in the aftermath of the 1990s war for independence. Using the public “face” of memory – monuments, museums and commemorations – I contend that Croatia’s narrative of self and self- sacrifice (hence “KRVatska” – a portmanteau of “blood/krv” and “Croatia/Hrvatska”) is divided between praising “defenders”/“branitelji”, selectively remembering its victims/“žrtve”, and silencing the Serb minority. While this divide is partially dependent on geography and the various ways the Croatian War for Independence came to an end in Dalmatia and Slavonia, the “defender” narrative remains preeminent. As well, I discuss the division of Croatian civil society, particularly between veterans’ associations and regional minority bodies, which continues to disrupt amicable relations among the Yugoslav successor states and places Croatia in a generally undesired but unshakable space between “Europe” and the Balkans. 1 Workshop: War and Identity in the Balkans and the Middle East WORKING PAPER Table of Contents Abstract ...................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Two Puzzling Judgments in the Hague | the Economist
    7/3/2014 War crimes in the former Yugoslavia: Two puzzling judgments in The Hague | The Economist Eastern approaches Ex­communist Europe War crimes in the former Yugoslavia Two puzzling judgments in The Hague Jun 1st 2013, 16:45 by T.J. THE credibility of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (http://www.icty.org/) in The Hague is in shreds and few understand the reasoning behind recent judgments. This seems to be the consensus of comments made in the wake of two landmark judgements last week. In one the Croatian state was implicated in war crimes in Bosnia during the 1992-95 war. And in another Serbian officials were acquitted. Carl Bildt, the Swedish foreign minister, who has a long history of involvement in Balkans summed it in a tweet (mailto:%3cblockquote%20class=%22twitter- tweet%22%3e%3cp%3eIt%20is%20becoming%20increasingly%20difficult%20to%20see%20the%20consistency%20or%20logic%20in%20the%20different%20judgements%20by%20the%20ICTY%20war%20crimes%20tribunal.%3c/p%3e—%20Carl%20Bildt%20(@carlbildt)%20%3ca%20href=%22https://twitter.com/carlbildt/status/340122572177936385%22%3eMay%2030,%202013%3c/a%3e%3c/blockquote%3e) : “it is becoming increasingly difficult to see the consistency or logic in the different judgements.” On May 30thJovica Stanisic (pictured above on the right), the former head of Serbia’s secret police, was acquitted (http://www.icty.org/sid/11329) of all crimes, along with Franko Simatovic aka Frenki (pictured above on the left), who had been his right hand man. They had been charged with persecution, murder and ethnic cleansing in Bosnia and Croatia.
    [Show full text]
  • Faraway, Yet Close Friends Developing Relations Between Japan and Republic of Croatia Establishment of Diplomatic Relations
    FARAWAY, YET CLOSE FRIENDS DEVELOPING RELATIONS BETWEEN JAPAN AND REPUBLIC OF CROATIA ESTABLISHMENT OF DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS Relations between the two Governments Mutual state visits between the two countries fter the declaration of independence by the Croa- roatia and Japan have exchanged numerous visits Atian Parliament in 1991, the Government of Japan Cby dignitaries and high-ranking officials soon after recognized the Republic of Croatia as an independent the establishment of diplomatic relations. But even be- state on March 17, 1992, on the occasion of the Cro- fore Croatia’s independence, their Majesties the Emperor atian Minister of Foreign Affairs Zvonimir Šeparović’s and Empress of Japan visited Dubrovnik in 1976, back visit to Japan. The two countries established diplomatic then as Their Imperial Highnesses Crown Prince Akihito relations on March 5, 1993. Croatia opened its embassy and Princess Michiko. In 2002 their daughter, Her Imperial in Tokyo on September 5, 1993, and Japan opened its Highness Princess Sayako, visited Zagreb and Dubrovnik. embassy in Zagreb on February 8, 1998. H.E. Mr. Stjepan Mesić, President of the Republic of Cro- atia, visited Japan in 2008. On that occasion, a Memoran- dum on Cooperation on Education, Science, Technology and Sports was signed between the Ministry of Educa- tion, Culture, Sport, Science and Technology of Japan and Ministry of Science, Education and Sports of the Republic of Croatia, to commemorate the 15th anniversary of diplomatic relations between two countries. On the occasion of the 20th anniversary of diplomatic relations Their Imperial Highnesses Prince and Princess Akishino visited Croatia. During their visit a commem- oration ceremony was held in the presence of Their Imperial Highnesses, H.E.
    [Show full text]
  • Annex 4: Mechanisms in Europe
    ANNEX 4: MECHANISMS IN EUROPE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA Conflict Background and Political Context The Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY) emerged from World War II as a communist country under the rule of President Josip Broz Tito. The new state brought Serbs, Croats, Bosnian Muslims, Albanians, Macedonians, Montenegrins, and Slovenes into a federation of six separate republics (Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Macedonia, Montenegro, and Serbia) and two autonomous provinces of Serbia (Kosovo and Vojvodina). Ten years after Tito’s death in 1980, the country was in economic crisis and the mechanisms he had designed to both repress and balance ethnic demands in the SFRY were under severe strain. Slobodan Milošević had harnessed the power of nationalism to consolidate his power as president of Serbia. The League of Communists of Yugoslavia dissolved in January 1990, and the first multiparty elections were held in all Yugoslav republics, carrying nationalist parties to power in Bosnia, Croatia, Slovenia, and Macedonia.1763 Meanwhile, Milošević and his political allies asserted control in Kosovo, Vojvodina, and Montenegro, giving Serbia’s president de facto control over four of the eight votes in the federal state’s collective presidency. This and the consolidation of Serbian control over the Yugoslav People’s Army (YPA) heightened fears and played into ascendant nationalist feelings in other parts of the country. Declarations of independence by Croatia and Slovenia on June 25, 1991, brought matters to a head. Largely homogenous Slovenia succeeded in defending itself through a 10-day conflict that year against the Serb-dominated federal army, but Milošević was more determined to contest the independence of republics with sizeable ethnic Serb populations.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Rights Defenders in Serbia
    Humanitarian Law Center Research, Documentation and Memory 67 Makenzijeva, 11110 Belgrade, Serbia and Montenegro Tel/Fax: +381 11 3444 313 +381 11 3444 314 Email: [email protected] Home Page: http://www.hlc.org.yu 26 March 2006 Human Rights Defenders in Serbia Throughout the rule of Slobodan Milošević, Human Rights Organizations and Human Rights Defenders were treated as harmless marginal groups and individuals. Between 1991 and 1999 the regime of Slobodan Milošević did not ban a single anti-war demonstration by nongovernmental organizations because they served as proof to the international community of his ‘democratic’ attitude towards the ‘handful’ that did not support him. The regime and its media paid little attention to the reports of domestic human rights organizations on human rights and humanitarian law violations during the armed conflict because the regime felt secure and supported by the majority of citizens. The period of the NATO bombing campaign from 24 March until 9 June 1999 united the opposition, civil society and regime. Nongovernmental organizations led the way in criticizing the international community and urging the citizens to keep their differences with the government aside as long as bombs kept dropping on the country. It was in those circumstances that several Human Rights Defenders and human rights organizations became the target of government media and secret services above all for publicly pointing out that the regime was taking advantage of the NATO campaign to settle with the Albanians. Because of its attitude during the NATO campaign, the Humanitarian Law Centre (HLC) was twice visited by members of the military security service, who threatened to bring charges of espionage against the HLC Executive Director; also, financial police examined the organization’s accounts and financial records for three weeks.
    [Show full text]
  • The Kosovo Report
    THE KOSOVO REPORT CONFLICT v INTERNATIONAL RESPONSE v LESSONS LEARNED v THE INDEPENDENT INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON KOSOVO 1 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Great Clarendon Street, Oxford ox2 6dp Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford Executive Summary • 1 It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, Address by former President Nelson Mandela • 14 and education by publishing worldwide in Oxford New York Map of Kosovo • 18 Athens Auckland Bangkok Bogotá Buenos Aires Calcutta Introduction • 19 Cape Town Chennai Dar es Salaam Delhi Florence Hong Kong Istanbul Karachi Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Mumbai Nairobi Paris São Paulo Singapore Taipei Tokyo Toronto Warsaw PART I: WHAT HAPPENED? with associated companies in Berlin Ibadan Preface • 29 Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the uk and in certain other countries 1. The Origins of the Kosovo Crisis • 33 Published in the United States 2. Internal Armed Conflict: February 1998–March 1999 •67 by Oxford University Press Inc., New York 3. International War Supervenes: March 1999–June 1999 • 85 © Oxford University Press 2000 4. Kosovo under United Nations Rule • 99 The moral rights of the author have been asserted Database right Oxford University Press (maker) PART II: ANALYSIS First published 2000 5. The Diplomatic Dimension • 131 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, 6. International Law and Humanitarian Intervention • 163 without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, 7. Humanitarian Organizations and the Role of Media • 201 or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organisation.
    [Show full text]
  • Process of Reconciliation in the Western Balkans and Turkey: a Qualitative Study
    Process of Reconciliation in the Western Balkans and Turkey: A Qualitative Study This project is financed by the European Union Process of Reconciliation in the Western Balkans and Turkey: A Qualitative Study Mirjana Adamović Anja Gvozdanović Marko Kovačić Banja Luka / Zagreb, 2017 Published by: Compex d.o.o. Braće Pišteljića 1, 78 000 Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina Institute for Social Research in Zagreb (ISRZ) Amruševa 11, Zagreb, Croatia Authors: Mirjana Adamović, Institute for Social Research in Zagreb (ISRZ), Croatia Anja Gvozdanović, Institute for Social Research in Zagreb (ISRZ), Croatia Marko Kovačić, Institute for Social Research in Zagreb (ISRZ), Croatia National researchers: Jasmin Jašarević, Youth Resource Center (ORC), Bosnia and Herzegovina Tamara Čirgić, Forum MNE, Montenegro Nora Ahmeti, LENS, Kosovo Ilija Jovanović, Educational Center Kruševac (ECK), Serbia Irida Agolli, Beyond Barriers Association (BBA), Albania Toše Zafirov, Progress Institute for Social Democracy, Macedonia Varduhi Balyan, Toplum Gönüllüleri Vakfı (TOG), Turkey Reviewers: dr.sc. Danijel Baturina, University of Zagreb, Faculty of Law dr.sc. Simona Kuti, Institute for Migration and Ethnic Studies, Zagreb Translator: Zorica Škoflek Layout and cover design: Nebojša Đumić Printed by: Compex, Braće Pišteljića 1, 78 000 Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina [email protected] Circulation: 300 copies This publication has been produced with assistance of the European Union. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of the authors and can in
    [Show full text]
  • Humanitarian Law Center – Individual Contributions for Universal Periodic Review, Serbia, June 2008
    Humanitarian Law Center – individual contributions for Universal Periodic Review, Serbia, June 2008 About the Humanitarian Law Center The Humanitarian Law Center (HLC) helps post-Yugoslav societies re-establish the rule of law and come to terms with the legacy of large-scale past human rights abuses, in order to prevent their recurrence, to ensure accountability, and to serve justice. HLC was founded in 1992 by human rights defender Natasa Kandic to document human rights violations committed during the armed conflicts in the former Yugoslavia, and to provide legal aid and protection to victims of past human rights abuses before national courts. 40 dedicated professionals, with expertise in human rights and transitional justice, work for HLC. The organisation has offices located in Belgrade, Serbia, and Pristina, Kosovo. HLC implements a victim-centered transitional justice programme which is realized through three units: Documentation and Memory, Justice and Institutional Reform and Public information and Outreach. Cooperation with the Hague Tribunal I. In order to fulfil its mandate the Hague Tribunal relies heavily on cooperation from the Republic of Serbia. Serbia’s cooperation is, however, incomplete on three counts: 1) the Serbian Ministry of Interior and Military continue to withhold documents requested by the Office of the Prosecutor, 2) the Serbian Ministry of Interior has as recently as April 2008, interfered with a Hague Tribunal protected witness, and 3) Serbia has ignored the ICJ judgement in the Genocide case of Bosnia vs. Serbia, failing to take measures to ensure full compliance with its obligation under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide to punish acts of genocide, and failing to transfer individuals accused of genocide or any of those other acts for trial by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, and to co-operate fully with that Tribunal; II.
    [Show full text]
  • War Crimes Chamber of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina
    PROSECUTIONS CASE STUDIES SERIES The War Crimes Chamber in Bosnia and Herzegovina: From Hybrid to Domestic Court (2008) ©2008 International Center for Transitional Justice and Bogdan Ivaniševi ć ©2008 International Center for Transitional Justice This document may be cited as Bogdan Ivanišević, The War Crimes Chamber in Bosnia and Herzegovina: From Hybrid to Domestic Court (2008), International Center for Transitional Justice i ABOUT THE ICTJ The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ) assists countries pursuing accountability for past mass atrocity or human rights abuse. The Center works in societies emerging from repressive rule or armed conflict, as well as in established democracies where historical injustices or systemic abuse remain unresolved. In order to promote justice, peace, and reconciliation, government officials and nongovernmental advocates are likely to consider a variety of transitional justice approaches including both judicial and nonjudicial responses to human rights crimes. The ICTJ assists in the development of integrated, comprehensive, and localized approaches to transitional justice comprising five key elements: prosecuting perpetrators, documenting and acknowledging violations through nonjudicial means such as truth commissions, reforming abusive institutions, providing reparations to victims, and facilitating reconciliation processes. The Center is committed to building local capacity and generally strengthening the emerging field of transitional justice, and works closely with organizations and experts around the world to do so. By working in the field through local languages, the ICTJ provides comparative information, legal and policy analysis, documentation, and strategic research to justice and truth-seeking institutions, nongovernmental organizations, governments, and others. ABOUT THE AUTHOR Bogdan Ivanišević has been a Belgrade-based consultant to the former Yugoslavia Program of the International Center for Transitional Justice since November 2006.
    [Show full text]
  • Competition Between Minority Ethnic Parties in Post-Conflict Countries
    Competition Between Minority Ethnic Parties in Post-conflict Countries: Performance of Minority Parties in Croatia and Macedonia by Dane Taleski Submitted to Central European University Department of Political Science In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Supervisor: András Bozóki Budapest, September 2014 1 ABSTRACT Academic and policy studies argue that an inclusive approach is needed for sustainable peacebuilding. This justifies the inclusion of former combatants into political parties, but some argue that it can have negative consequences for democratization. Institutional engineering is proposed to forge cross-cutting parties; however it is puzzling to find that parties from rebels often dominate in the post-conflict period. To address this puzzle I look at minority ethnic parties in post-conflict Croatia and Macedonia. SDSS dominates the competition between Serb parties in Croatia and DUI dominates between Albanian parties in Macedonia. To answer why this is so, I first look at the process of their formation and functioning and second I compared them to other minority parties. Despite the common history in Yugoslavia, the inter-ethnic conflicts, the post-conflict conditions and institutional environments for minority politics were very different in Croatia and Macedonia. My level of analysis is the competition between minority parties in each country. Because of the similar outcomes, under varying conditions, I consider that the finding in one country control for the other. Using process tracing I analyzed data from 78 interviews, party content, media and archival sources. The findings were corroborated with quantitative analysis of electoral data from national and sub- national elections in the entire post-conflict period.
    [Show full text]