The Court of Appeals

Fulfilling the Right for Victims of Human Rights Abuses 1 to seek Reparation before the Serbian Courts Serving Justice or Trivializing Crimes? 2012 Report 2 Contents Introduction..................................................................................................................................5 I Compensation Lawsuits in Serbia: Main Characteristics.................................................7 1. Victim-Unfriendly Interpretation of the Provisions of the Statute of Limitations in Reparation Cases.........................................................................................................................8 2. Courts Minimize the Responsibility of the State...............................................................10 3. Impunity for Crimes Committed in the 1990s Thwarts Reparation Processes................................................................................................................11 4. Rigorous Standards for Admission of Evidence Ignore the Context of Massive Human Rights Violations......................................................................................12 5. Courts Trust Neither the Victims nor the Evidence They Present.................................12 6. Unprofessional Treatment of Victims by Judges and the RJP............................................13 7. Victims’ Rights to Fair Trial Violated by Lengthy Court Proceedings................................................................................................................................14 8. Compensation Awards Fail to Advance the Culture of Human Rights in Serbia.......................................................................................................................................15 II Overview of Cases in Which Victims are Represented by the HLC.........................16 1. Torture of Bosniak Residents in Šljivovica and Mitrovo Polje.........................................16 1.1. Enes Bogilović and Mušan Džebo Case.............................................................19 3 1.2. The Case of Mujo Vatreš, Halil Durmišević, and a minor, Senad Jusufbegović..............................................................................................................24 2. Torture of Bosniaks in Sandžak..............................................................................................29 2.1. The Case of Sead Rovčanin..................................................................................30 2.2. The Case of Fehrat Suljić......................................................................................35 2.3. The Case of Šefćet Mehmedović.........................................................................41 2.4. The Case of Šefko Bibić.........................................................................................45 3. Torture and Illegal Detention of Kosovo Albanians between 1998 and 2000......................................................................................................................................49 3.1. The Case of Zenun Behrami................................................................................50 3.2. The Case of Tahir Bytyqi, Smajl Gashi, Rrahman Elshani, Hysni Podrimçaku, and a minor, Bekim Istogu..............................................................54 3.3. The Case of Mustafa Kolgeci................................................................................59 3.4. The Case of Refik Hasani, Sokol Jakupi, Agim Ibrahimi, and Zijadin Blakqori.....................................................................................................................62 3.5. The Case of Xheladin and Zenel Bylykbashi and Jashar Kukici.........................................................................................................................66 3.6. The Case of Behram Sahiti, Elmi Musliu, Enver Baleci, Elmi Musliu, and, a minor, Faton Halilaj..............................................................................................69 3.7. The Case of Agron, Ekrem, and Fahri Ejupi.......................................................72 4. The Case of Saranda, Jehona, and Lirie Bogujevci (War Crime in Podujevo, March 28, 1999).........................................................................................................................76 5. The Murder of Mušan Husović (War Crime Committed in Kukurovići on February 18, 1993)....................................................................................................................80 4 Introduction The obligation of the State to provide adequate financial redress to victims of human rights abuses1 is defined in numerous international conventions on human rights and is derived from the fundamental legal principle of accepting responsibility for harm done. In most societies that have gone through periods of massive human rights violations, the issue of financial reparations for victims is one of the most important elements of establishing the rule of law and pro- viding justice for crimes committed in the past. Identification of victims, creation of programs suitable for the needs of victims, and ways in which those programs are financed are just a few of the important issues considered by post-conflict societies in their overall effort to provide reparations to victims of human rights violations.2 After the toppling of the regime of Slobodan Milošević, the issue of reparations for victims of human rights abuses committed by Serbian forces3 in the 1990s was not considered very important by institutions in Serbia, except in two high profile cases of crimes committed against Milošević’s political oppo- 5 nents, which outraged everyone in Serbia.4 Although this aspect of establishing transitional justice is also less than satisfactory in other post-Yugoslav states5, the lack of interest in these issues in Serbia is unparalleled in the region. Ethnic or other discrimination against the victims of human rights abuses committed by Serbian forces, in court proceedings which were initiated to grant them the status of civil victims of war is prevalent. Court practice makes it almost 1 “Victim” is an individual upon whom damage was inflicted, including physical injury, psy- chological harm, emotional suffering, financial loss or a significant reduction in fundamental rights, either by acts or failure to prevent such acts, both of which represent serious violations of international criminal law or international humanitarian law. The term “victims” also includes immediate family members or dependent family members of the direct victim”. (Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law, Resolution of the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted No. 60/147, adopted on December 16, 2005). 2 More information on the experiences of other post-conflict societies in the creation of victim reparation programs can be found in: Pablo De Greiff, ed., The Handbook of Repara- tions (Belgrade: Humanitarian Law Center, 2011). 3 “Serbian security forces” includes the Yugoslav National Army (JNA), Yugoslav Army (VJ), and Ministry of the Interior (MUP) forces of the Republic of Serbia. 4 The RS paid €250,000 each to the families of four victims killed in an attempted assassina- tion of Vuk Drašković and €250,000 to the family of assassinated former president of the Presidency of the Socialist Republic of Serbia, Ivan Stambolić. 5 See: Transitional Justice in Post-Yugoslav Countries: Report for 2010-2011, (Belgrade: Humani- tarian Law Center, 2013), pages 107-125. impossible for them to exercise their right to reparations, creating an even stronger impression that a new systematic wave of human rights abuse is underway in Serbia. Due to the fact that Serbian-controlled armed forces committed crimes on the territory of almost the entire former Yugoslavia (Croatia, BiH, Kosovo, and Serbia), there is a huge number of victims who should receive reparations from the Republic of Serbia. A vast majority of them are victims who were citizens of other states at the time the crimes against them were committed (Croatia, BiH), or became citizens of other countries after the end of an armed conflict (Kosovo). The other group of victims encompasses citizens of Serbia or those who became citizens after the fact.6 In order to exercise their rights, victims from other post-Yugoslav countries and citizens of Serbia have filed several hundred compensation lawsuits against the Republic of Serbia privately or by proxy through the Humanitarian Law Center (HLC)7. In addition to court proceedings, several citizens of Serbia 6 have initiated administrative proceedings against the Republic of Serbia in order to be granted the status of civil victims of war as stipulated in the Law on the Rights of Civil Invalids of War.8 Compensation lawsuits are based on several international conventions and human rights protection standards9 and on the Law of Contracts and Torts (ZOO): Article 172: (1) A legal subject is responsible for damages caused to a third party by its organs during the fulfillment of their duties or with respect to the commis- sion of their duties. 6 These are mostly residents of the Republic of Croatia who have fled to Serbia following Operation “Storm/Oluja” and then pressed into service by the RS. 7 From 2000 to the present day, in compensation lawsuits filed against the State (Serbia, Montenegro, and Kosovo)

Load more