By Dragutin Nenezić
A few days ago, a first-instance verdict was delivered in the “Banjska” case, sentencing two Serbs to life imprisonment and one to 30 years in prison. Here, I would like to address the strictly legal aspects of such a verdict.
Under the Kosovo Criminal Code, the offenses they were charged with carry a maximum sentence of 15 years or life imprisonment (for committing a terrorist act), or 10 years or life imprisonment (for serious crimes against the constitutional order or security).
The Code also provides that, when determining a sentence, courts must consider a number of factors, including the degree of criminal responsibility, motives, the extent of harm or threat to protected values, the circumstances in which the offense was committed, the prior conduct of the offender, admission of guilt, personal circumstances, and behavior after the crime.
Taking into account the overall conduct of the defendants, as well as their closing statements and those of their defense attorneys, it is legally impossible to justify the imposition of life sentences.
Incidentally, the 30-year sentence appears to have been imposed under a provision allowing life imprisonment to be commuted to a term of up to 35 years, since the maximum combined sentence for multiple offenses cannot exceed 25 years.
However, what is impossible for a lawyer appears possible for Minister Sveçla, who stated that the standard of “maximum punishment for all those involved” should apply to every participant “as part of a much broader network of 45 identified individuals,” without exception. In doing so, he effectively undermined the Criminal Code and confirmed the absolutist nature of the власти to which he belongs, as well as its complete disregard for the rule of law, which its leaders so often invoke.
He also confirmed that, in the “Banjska” case, there is not only an arrest warrant but also a broader list, based on which another Serb was arrested a week earlier.
Of course, if new elections are held in Kosovo (which will soon be known), both this verdict and that arrest will be among Kurti’s central campaign topics, as his policy largely revolves around such issues.
Given all of this, the question must once again—more than ever—be raised about the justification for returning to the abandoned judicial institutions in northern Kosovo, or more broadly, about forcing Serbs into a system that is not favorable to them and operates in the manner described.
Recently, there have been rumors that such a return is being considered. Without addressing their credibility, the following should be noted:
– Even if judges and prosecutors return, their number is small for various reasons (age, retirement, possible disqualification, etc.), and the institutions they return to will be predominantly Albanian, like all others, as I wrote a year ago;
– The influx of new judges and prosecutors is severely limited due to issues with diploma verification and bar examinations;
– Finally, the status of UPKM diplomas is also problematic, as their continued validity essentially depends on the future status of the institution itself, which is now more uncertain than ever.
On that note, the absolute chaos into which the “agreement” of March 14 has turned demonstrates the capacity, if not the intentions, of those who made it. Their approach to the issues mentioned above will show what they think about Serbs in Kosovo—if they think about them at all.
The essence is that the Kosovo judiciary, as well as the legal system itself, is unfavorable to Serbs. This is masked by the superficial participation of Serbs, which is so negligible—and in the long term questionable due to the factors mentioned—that it renders itself meaningless.
The Kosovo system is, in a ritualistic sense, consuming Serbs, and this verdict is just the most blatant and recent example.
Just a few weeks ago, a similar text could have been written about the arrests of Serbs for war crimes, where in just one year (since my previously cited text), the number of such cases has risen from 33 to 40.
Finally, a bit of symbolism.
The verdict in the “Banjska” case was delivered on April 24, the same day Slobodan Milošević visited Kosovo Polje in 1987 and told gathered Serbs that no one had the right to beat them.
It seems that in 39 years not much has changed—then, as now, power in Kosovo was in the hands of Albanians, and Serbs were seeking their rights—except that today there is no longer talk of wolves and rabbits (a contemporary equivalent of Milošević’s statement), but silence.
There is silence because today’s authorities essentially pursue a policy dictated by Brussels, according to which crimes committed in Kosovo can only be tried there. As a result, they can offer Serbs in Kosovo nothing but integration at any cost—and that is exactly what they are doing.
In this context, a bit more about anniversaries. Some time ago, the media were flooded (for reasons unknown to me) with articles marking the anniversary of the Brussels Agreement, followed by coverage of the anniversary of the Savamala demolition (albeit a round one). The Brussels Agreement was indeed a critical phase in the long process of integrating Serbs from Kosovo into the Kosovo system, but not the decisive one—the key moment, I still maintain, was the removal of barricades without a return to institutions in 2022.
And the Savamala demolition was certainly not the first instance of authorities imposing their will by force—that dates back to the local elections in northern Kosovo in 2013. It would be interesting to follow where the key actors from those events are today and how they feel about them.
Anyone who does not see that it all began in northern Kosovo in 2013—not in Savamala in 2016—and that what is happening today to those convicted in the Banjska case and to UPKM professors could happen to anyone, anywhere, simply does not understand the situation at all.
All opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial stance of KoSSev. KoSSev is not the author of this text.
Preuzimanje i objavljivanje tekstova sa portala KoSSev nije dozvoljeno bez navođenja izvora. Hvala na poštovanju etike novinarske profesije.
