Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia, Kosovo, Montenegro) 1 SERBIA ing to the closure of several newspapers, notably of the most prominent indepen- IHF FOCUS: The NATO bombing cam- dent political daily in Serbia, Nasa Borba. paign; restrictions on human rights relat- The law severely restricted freedom of ex- ed to the “state of war”; freedom of ex- pression and the media in 1999. pression and the media; peaceful assem- bly; independence of the judiciary; fair The 1998 University Act was part of a gen- trial and detainees’ rights; draft evaders; eral campaign of increasing state control ill-treatment by law enforcement officials; over all the institutions. This had two extra-judicial killings and summary jus- short-term goals: elimination of “inade- tice; security services and right to priva- quate” professors and other education pro- cy; protection of national minorities; free- fessionals from university, and forcing the dom of movement; protection of refugees students to renounce any political activi- and displaced persons; restrictions on uni- ties and engagement. Indicative of the versity independence; social and econom- regime’s intentions was the statement of ic rights. Vojislav Seselj, president of the Serbian Radical Party, printed in Glas javnosti2: “We put things in order at the universities, In 1999, Serbian authorities, unsettled by we did the same with the media, and we the massive civil protests in 1996/1997 intend to do the same with the judiciary. (triggered by local election rigging) used With this step by step approach, every- mounting repression as the only response thing in Serbia will be put in order.” to widespread dissatisfaction of citizens. Despite the desire for change among the The atmosphere created in 1998 contin- public, there were indications of a signifi- ued through 1999. At the outset of NATO cant loss of faith in the opposition, as re- intervention (24 March 1999) in the war in flected in poor attendance at the Alliance Kosovo, in addition to fear of bombard- for Changes rallies. The inability of both ments, people feared mostly the escalation the regime and opposition to address key of repression by Serbian authorities and a issues and their focus on either the preser- deteriorating situation in the post-war peri- vation or take over of power plunged Ser- od. These fears appeared to have been bia into a turbulent year of repression and fully justified. Increased repression was violence. presented by the Serbian government as justified in a struggle against “aggressors During 1998, the early stages of the con- and domestic traitors,” and to prevent the flict with increasing government brutality, outbreak of civil war. Kosovo enjoyed both the public and tacit backing of almost the entire political scene The pro-government media were tasked in Serbia. Also in 1998, the adoption of the with shaping perceptions of the war, disre- Public Information Law underscored the garding the information from independent, fact that Serbia was devoid of political ethnic Albanian and international sources alternatives or of genuine pluralism, and and opting instead for strident rhetoric de- facilitated a crackdown on the media lead- monizing Serbia’s “enemies,” both domes- 1 Based on Serbian Helsinki Committee, Report on the Increasing Repression in Serbia, November, and updates. 2 1 March 1999 432 Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia, Kosovo, Montenegro) tic and foreign. Although during the war expression related to the “state of war,” almost all the media used this approach created an atmosphere of persecution and (associated with economic successes – the denunciation comparable to the Soviet Banja Luka-based weekly Reporter experi- purges under Stalin, adding to the break- enced a circulation boom during the war; down of Serbian society. its 10,000 copies were sold every day on the streets of Belgrade), when the war Misconduct by law enforcement officials ended, the approach to reporting greatly and harassment of individuals continued. changed. The majority of leading dailies – The practice by law enforcement officials Glas javnosti, Blic, Danas, and Vecernje of summoning people for “informative Novosti – started reporting in a more ob- talks” included detention of citizens by the jective manner. A number of local TV and police, subjection to physical violence, radio stations also followed the post-war threats, and demands that they denounce trend. As the media displayed more objec- other citizens. An action named the tivity and professionalism, the authorities “check on citizens’ residence permits” grew more repressive. As a result, dracon- seemed designed to intimidate those citi- ian fines, bans on certain issues and intim- zens who were not politically organized. idation of journalists became more com- Police were empowered to enter the mon. homes of all citizens. Whether this initia- tive by the Ministry of Interior aimed at A series of decrees passed in the context of regulating the registers of military con- Serbian authorities declaring a “state of scripts, listing all refugees or simply intim- war” and beginning in March 1999, fur- idating citizens remained unclear. ther restricted many rights and freedoms of Serbian citizens, creating new “sub-legal” During the war, a decision on the manda- instruments of control available to the Ser- tory possession of IDs by all persons over bian authorities, and affecting freedom of 14 years of age was enforced. This seemed movement, the rights of detainees, the aimed at enabling the state to prepare nec- right to privacy, labor rights and freedom essary mobilization data for children who of expression. would in three or four years’ time be ready for military service. War was also a pretext for the Serbian au- thorities to harass its opponents through During 1999, violent repression in the the judicial system. Trials of deserters were form of assaults on political opponents, clearly aimed at intimidating citizens, journalists and other citizens increased. It since figures indicated good mobilization escalated during the spring war, and diver- results. In Serbia 20,000 young men faced sified and grew more organized in the charges of desertion, while the figure in post-war period. Participants in the Al- Montenegro was 14,0003, and group trials liance for Change protests were beaten by replaced the trials of individuals held dur- uniformed police, plainclothes officers, or ing the wars with Slovenia, Croatia and unidentified men dressed alike and armed Bosnia-Herzegovina. These, combined with baseball bats. A number of deaths of with the de facto reintroduction of legisla- prominent figures, both those once con- tion restricting freedom of opinion and sidered close to the Serbian authorities 3 Meanwhile, Montenegro adopted the Amnesty Act at the end of 1999. 433 Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia, Montenegro, Kosovo) and political opponents, may have been military value with a substantial risk of politically motivated assassinations.4 An- civilian deaths, such as the headquarters other possible cause may have been dis- of Radio and Television Serbia (RTS) in putes over control of the Mafia-style illegal Belgrade. HWR concluded that NATO ac- trade in Serbia or over import-export busi- tions had in these cases violated interna- ness controlled by state-owned compa- tional humanitarian law. Infrastructural nies. None of these cases had been solved damage done in Serbia by NATO bombing nor any indictments filed by the end of affected power supplies, access to fresh 1999. water and caused environmental pollu- tion, all having serious consequences for The NATO Bombing Campaigns civilians in Serbia. On 24 March, NATO launched a humani- Restrictions on tarian intervention in the FRY with the stat- Human Rights Associated ed aim of preventing further large-scale with the “State of War”6 human rights abuses and killings of Koso- vo Albanians by Serbian forces in the province. This aim was to be accom- The adoption of the Decree on the Procla- plished by a high-tech air campaign in mation of a State of War on 24 March by which civilian casualties in Serbia and the federal government established the Kosovo were to be minimized. Targets of basis for passing a spate of decrees re- the bombing were to be exclusively of mil- stricting freedoms and rights of citizens. It itary significance. However, in February also marked the beginning of a genuine 2000, Human Rights Watch (HWR) pub- “sub-legal” repression. Just two weeks lished documented evidence that the num- later, the Decree on Enforcement of the ber of incidents causing civilian deaths criminal proceedings act during a state of (about 500 deaths in total) was at least war7 was adopted on 4 April. Provisions of three times higher than the estimate of- the act constituted changes to the criminal fered by the U.S. Defense Department.5 proceedings act in force, directly restricted The report identified four areas in which freedoms and rights of citizens envisaged NATO fell short of its obligation to mini- by the act and the republican and federal mize civilian deaths. These included: the constitutions, and determined terms of de- use of cluster bombs in populated areas; tention, bodies authorizing detention and attacks in populated areas during the day prerogatives of “competent bodies.” when civilians were likely to be present; attacks on mobile targets without ensuring The trend of “sub-legal” regulating of they were military in nature; and its deci- rights and freedoms of citizens continued sion to strike some targets of little or no with the adoption of a spate of decrees by 4 See the case of Slavko Curuvija, in Freedom of Expression and the Media and Extrajudicial Killings and Assaults on Political Opponents. 5 Human Rights Watch, “New Figures on Civilian Deaths in Kosovo War,” 7 February 2000, and “Pentagon Report Whitewashes Civilian Deaths in Yugoslavia,” 8 February 2000. 6 See also IHF statement, “Serbian Government Must Stop Violating Free Expression,” 28 January 1999.