human security in an uufinished state - Helsinki Committee for ...

Helsinki Committee for Human Rights in Serbia
speaking has a very protective attitude towards the state union in which
formation he took part." 1
As the referendum approaches, so the Serb pressures in regard to
amendments to the Montenegrin Act on referendum are increasing. Added to
that Belgrade has raised the issue of majority which should take a decision on
independence. Boris Tadić, President of Serbia, stated that decision on
independence of Montenegro "cannot be convincing unless it is taken by a
convincing majority" and warned that "a very small number of citizens in that
referendum may take a decision leading to disintegration of an internationally
recognized state. " 2
Prime Minister's List
The staunchest advocate of the state community is Prime Minister
Vojislav Koštunica. That stance of his was best demonstrated by his taking of
the list of 263,000 Montengrin citizens to the top Brussels officials, Xavier
Solana and Ollie Ren, as a crown evidence of non-feasibility of Montenegrin
independence. While handing in that list he stated: "This is an important
evidence for the future Montenegrin referendum if it ever comes to pass".
Along with the names of Montenegrin citizens living in Serbia, the list
includes the names of towns-a total of 176 towns in Serbia and the number of
Montenegrin citizens living in them (Ada - 72; Aleksinac - 563; Aleksandrovac –
210; Alibunar – 236 ...) The list also includes the names of 30,000 Kosovo
citizens. As it was officially explained the list was obtained by dint of the last
Serb census (census was not carried out in Kosovo since 1981). In fact it is a
Milosevic era list of voters drawn up during the 90's host of elections.
At play is obviously an attempt of the Serb government to prevent
Montenegrin indpendence by "relocation" of the voters contingent from Serbia
to Montenegro. Since the Montenegrin electorate totals 450,000 voters it is clear
that with additonal 263,000 voters the outcome of referendum would be called
into question. Prime Minister's move is illegitimate also from the constitutional
standpoint, for the Serb Constitution guarantees confidentiality of personal
data. The latter is also laid down by the republican Act on Personals, "which are
to be dislosed only if so agreed by the concerned persons." On the other hand
President of Serbia Boris Tadić and President of the Radical Party Tomislav
Nikolić assessed the Prime Minister's move as "justified and legitimate."
Podgorica daily Vijesti sharply criticized the stand of President of
Serbia, Boris Tadić, and pointed out that "Boris Tadić, who together with his
father ( academician Ljubomir Tadić, president of the Belgrade branch of
Movement for the Common State) instigated that name-counting, could as well
find his name on that list." The daily concluded that Montenegrin President,
1 Statement to agency Fonet in Podgorica, carried by Politika, 16 April 2005
2 Blic, 23 December 2005
470
Human Security in an Unfinished State
Filip Vujanović, who sent a protest letter to Tadić, "now understands that there
is no person to whom he may complain in Serbia." Filip Vujanović also warned
that "Vojislav Koštunica and his government have mounted an intense
campaign against Montenegro." 3
Slobodan Samardžić, an adviser to the Serb Prime Minister, thinks that
Montenegrin citizens in Serbia have the voting right and that "the Montenegrin
authorities are discriminating against their citiznes and engineering an artificial
division between the Serb and Montenegrin people." The same opinion was
voiced by the Serb Minister for the State Administration and Local Self-Rule,
Zoran Lončar. 4 Under the headline "Yellow Arm-Bands for Montenegrins" daily
Večernje novosti ran the following commentary: "If Montenegrin citizens in
Serbia cannot vote in a historic referendum, which would abolish both the 1918
and 1945 state creations, then what makes them citizens of Montenegro?
Djukanović and Vujanović, in collusion with Marović, and not Kostunica, are in
fact those bent on reducing their citizenship to a worthless chapel in their
homeland and are possibly planning for them genuine yellow arm-bands.". 5
Message which the other media tried to get across was the following:
"Koštunica is trying to explain to Brussels that if Milo Djukanović has his way,
in Serbia shall remain a quarter of million of totally disenfranchised voters." 6
That campaign was also aimed against Montenegrin citizens in Serbia.
Namely that part of population was exposed to various status-related threats, if
Montenegro went independent. Thus the Ministry for the State Administration
and Local Self-Rule on 2 December 2005 posted on its Web site the
recommendation that the Montenegrin citizens in Serbia be stripped of their
voting right, "for, in case of referendum on independence of Montenegro
criterion of citizenship must prevail over criterion of residence." Blagota Mitrić,
judge of the State Union court, responded to those threats by asserting that "no
ministry can strip citizens of their long-standing rights." Mitrić also made it
clear that "this was a classical form of discrimination, and if someone instituted
proceedings before the Court of Serbia and Montenegro, that position of the
Ministry would be declared null and void". 7
Srdjan Darmanović, member of the Venice Commission and professor
of the Podgorica Law Faculty, maintains that the issue of suffrage of
Montenegrin citizens was clarified: "They have been exercising their voting
right in Serbia for 15 years now, and since the first parliamentary elections they
voted in all referendums in Serbia. It is quite clear that they shall not be able to
vote in Montenegro." Darmanovic also underscored that "no international
pressure can make the Montenegrin government and parliamentary majority
3 Interview to BK TV, 14 July 2005
4 Večernje novosti, 20 June 2005
5 Večernje novosti, 21 June 2005
6 NIN, 23 June 2005
7 Monitor, 9 december 2005
471