The Effects of Transitional Justice Processes on Serbo- Croatian and Serbo-Bosnian Relations Master thesis for the award of the academic degree of Master of Arts (MA) at the Karl-Franzens-Universität Graz submitted by Nina MIROSAVLJEVIC at the institute: Centre for Southeast European Studies supervisor: Univ.-Prof. Dr. Phil. Florian Bieber Graz, 2015 The Effects of Transitional Justice Processes on Serbo-Croatian and Serbo-Bosnian Relations The thesis deals with the question of how transitional justice processes related to the 1990s Yugoslav wars affect relations between Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina as well as between Serbia and Croatia. The three chosen countries each have their own version of events that took place during the wartime, which makes reconciliation in the region difficult. Therefore, transitional justice tools—criminal prosecutions, truth commissions, symbolic and material reparations, and institutional reforms—should help societies establish the truth about past atrocities, provide justice to the victims, and thus lead to reconciliation. However, the analysis of the transitional justice processes in Serbia, Croatia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina has shown that transitional justice mechanisms were not properly implemented. Contrariwise, countries have misused them for the promotion of the official interpretations of recent past. Consequently these transitional justice processes have caused tensions in Serbian bilateral relations with Bosnia and Herzegovina and with Croatia. Hence, the transitional justice mechanisms failed to change the discourse since they were not aimed at genuine reckoning with the past. Key words: transitional justice, Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina Auswirkungen der Prozesse von Übergangsjustiz auf serbisch-kroatische und serbisch- bosnische Beziehungen Die Masterarbeit beschäftigt sich mit der Frage, wie die Prozesse der Übergangsjustiz bezüglich jugoslawischer Kriege in den 1990ern die Beziehungen zwischen Serbien und Bosnien und Herzegowina sowie zwischen Serbien und Kroatien beeinflussen. Die drei ausgewählten Länder haben jeweils ihre eigene Darstellung, was während der Kriegszeit geschah. Dies aber erschwert die Versöhnung in der Region. Die Instrumente der Übergangsjustiz – Strafverfolgung, Wahrheitskomissionen, symbolische und materielle Reparationen und institutionelle Reformen – sollen Gesellschaften helfen, die Wahrheit über vergangene Gräueltaten zu etablieren, den Opfern die Gerechtigkeit bereitzustellen und damit zur Versöhnung zu führen. Jedoch zeigte die Prozessanalyse der Übergangsjustiz in Serbien, Kroatien und Bosnien und Herzegowina, dass die Übergangsjustizmechanismen nicht korrekt durchgeführt wurden. Im Gegenteil, die Länder missbrauchten sie zur Promotion ihrer offiziellen Interpretationen der jüngeren Vergangenheit. Demzufolge riefen diese Prozesse der Übergangsjustiz eine Spannung in den bilateralen Beziehungen Serbiens mit Bosnien und Herzegowina und Kroatien hervor. Die Übergangsjustizmechanismen konnten daher den Diskurs nicht ändern, weil sie nicht auf die echte Vergangenheitsarbeit zielen. Schlüsselwörter: Übergangsjustiz, Serbien, Kroatien, Bosnien und Herzegowina TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 7 1.1 Methodology and structure .......................................................................................................... 10 2 TRANSITIONAL JUSTICE: DEFINITION AND ANALYSIS OF THE CONCEPT .............. 11 2.1 Approaches to transitional justice ............................................................................................... 13 3 TRANSITIONAL JUSTICE IN SELECTED POST-YUGOSLAV STATES ............................ 17 3.1 Serbia ........................................................................................................................................... 19 3.1.1 Criminal prosecution ............................................................................................................ 19 3.1.2 Truth-telling initiatives ......................................................................................................... 22 3.1.3 Reparations ........................................................................................................................... 24 3.1.4 Institutional reform ............................................................................................................... 26 3.2 Croatia ......................................................................................................................................... 26 3.2.1 Criminal prosecution ............................................................................................................ 26 3.2.2 Truth-telling initiatives ......................................................................................................... 29 3.2.3 Reparations ........................................................................................................................... 30 3.2.4 Institutional reform ............................................................................................................... 32 3.3 Bosnia and Herzegovina .............................................................................................................. 33 3.3.1 Criminal prosecution ............................................................................................................ 34 3.3.2 Truth-telling initiatives ......................................................................................................... 36 3.3.3 Reparations ........................................................................................................................... 38 3.3.4 Institutional reform ............................................................................................................... 39 3.4 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 40 4 ANALYSIS OF THE EFFECTS OF TRANSITIONAL JUSTICE PROCESSES ON SERBO- CROATIAN AND SERBO-BOSNIAN RELATIONS ..................................................................... 43 4.1 Serbo-Bosnian relations in the light of transitional justice .......................................................... 43 4.1.1 The effects of transitional justice processes related to the Srebrenica genocide .................. 43 4.1.2 Transitional justice processes related to war crimes processing .......................................... 47 4.2 Serbo-Croatian relations in the light of transitional justice ......................................................... 49 4.2.1 The effects of transitional justice processes related to the mutual genocide lawsuits .......... 50 4.2.2 Transitional justice processes related to war crimes processing .......................................... 51 4.2.3 Transitional justice processes related to symbolic reparations ............................................. 53 4.3 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 55 5 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION .............................................................................................. 57 6 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................................ 60 1 INTRODUCTION The third democratization wave and the emergence of the new world order in the wake of the Cold War prompted a new discourse of human rights, humanitarianism, and international law. It was in this context that the field of transitional justice emerged – an approach that seeks to answer the question of how to cope with the legacies of previous repressive rule or violent conflict (Teitel 2000, 3; Hilton 2010, 2). According to International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ), it “refers to the set of judicial and non-judicial measures that have been implemented by different countries in order to redress the legacies of massive human rights abuses. /It is/ an approach to achieve justice in times of transition from conflict and/or state repression” (ICTJ 2014). The establishment of truth commissions in several African and Latin American countries after many years of military dictatorships, the international tribunals for war crimes committed in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda as well as lustration and reparation practices in the former communist states are just few examples of how states in transition deal with their recent violent past (Ostojić 2007, 104). Although criminal prosecutions and truth commissions appear to be the most favoured means (Hilton 2010, 1), transitional justice includes also different material and symbolic reparation initiatives, memorialization efforts, various kinds of institutional reform and other approaches of redressing past wrongs (ICTJ 2014). The aim of these various models of transitional justice is to provide justice to the victims, to punish the perpetrators, to strengthen the rule of law, to come to terms with the past, to prevent the recurrence of such violence, and ultimately reconciliation (Ostojić 2007, 105; Subotić 2009, 3–4). Although relatively new, transitional justice is a burgeoning field of research. The post- Yugoslav space has received considerable attention in transitional justice literature and is indeed an interesting case to examine since each country has its own view on the