Advertisement

From prosecution to persecution: perceptions of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in Serbian domestic politics

  • Marlene Spoerri
  • Annette Freyberg-Inan
Article

Abstract

This paper explores the interconnections between the activities of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), their domestic perception in Serbia, and the effects of these perceptions on the recent evolution of Serbian politics. It argues that negative perceptions of the Tribunal have impacted upon domestic power balances by bolstering support for anti-reform forces and undermining the strength of the liberal democratic movement. The result is a destabilization of Serbia's liberal democratic transition. The paper aims to develop an understanding of how and why these destabilizing effects can take place. It argues that the ICTY's discursive linkage not to the norms of reconciliation or justice but, rather, to the experience of conditionality and the threat of international isolation has provided fertile grounds for anti-reformist revivals. It is this perceived international context that renders the experience of international transitional justice in Serbia, all too often, not one of prosecution but one of persecution.

Keywords

ICTY international justice political stability reform Serbia transition Yugoslavia 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank the editors of the JIRD, three anonymous referees, as well as colleagues at the Political Science Department of the University of Amsterdam and the Amsterdam School for Social Science Research for useful feedback on earlier versions of this work. This paper draws in part on the findings of fieldwork conducted for the Master's thesis of Marlene Spoerri at the Department of Political Science, University of Amsterdam (July 2005).

References

  1. Arendt, Hannah (2005) Responsibility and Judgment, New York: Schocken.Google Scholar
  2. Askin, Kelly D. (2002) ‘Reflections on Some of the Most Significant Achievements of the ICTY’, New England Law Review 37: 903–914.Google Scholar
  3. Barria, Lilian and Steven Roper (2005) ‘How Effective Are International Criminal Tribunals? An Analysis of the ICTY and ICTR’, International Journal of Human Rights 9 (3): 349–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bertelsmann, Stiftung (2006) ‘Transformation Index: Serbia and Montenegro’, available at http://www.bertelsmann-transformation-index.de/168.0.html?L=1, last accessed 10 December 2007.
  5. Bildt, Carl (2001) ‘A Second Chance in the Balkans’, Foreign Affairs 80 (1): 148–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boje, Thomas P., Bart van Steenbergen and Sylvia Walby (1999) European Societies: Fusion or Fission? London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Bunce, Valerie and Sharon Wolchik (2006) ‘Favorable Conditions and Electoral Revolutions’, Journal of Democracy 17 (4): 5–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Call, Charles T. (2004) ‘Is Transitional Justice Really Just?’ Brown Journal of World Affairs 6 (1), online.Google Scholar
  9. Caplan, Richard and John Feffer, eds, (1996) Europe's New Nationalism: States and Minorities in Conflict, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Carothers, Thomas (2005) ‘The End of the Transition Paradigm’, Journal of Democracy 13 (1): 5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Center for Free Election and Democracy (2007) ‘Research on Public Opinion in Serbia: Early Summer 2007’, available at http://www.cesid.org/eng/programi/istrazivanja/index.jsp, last accessed 7 December 2007.
  12. Crawford, Beverly, ed., (1995) Markets, States, and Democracy: The Political Economy of Post-Communist Transformation, Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  13. Dahl, Robert (1991) Democracy and its Critics, Yale: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Davis, Howard H. and Chris Rootes, eds, (1994) A New Europe? Social Change and Political Transformation, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Del Ponte, Carla (2007) ‘Statement by Carla del Ponte, Prosecutor, International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia to the Security Council’, available at http://www.un.org/icty/pressreal/2007/pr1202e-annex.htm, last accessed 11 December, 2007.
  16. Diamond, Larry (1999) Developing Democracy: Toward Consolidation, Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Dimitrijević, Vojin (2002) ‘Justice Must be Done and Seem to be Done’, East European Constitutional Review 11 (1–2): 59–62.Google Scholar
  18. Dimitrova, Antoaneta and Geoffrey Pridham (2004) ‘International Actors and Democracy Promotion in Central and Eastern Europe: The Integration Model and Its Limits’, Democratization 11 (5): 91–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Emerson, Michael and Gergana Noutcheva (2004) ‘Europeanisation as a Gravity Model of Democratization’, Center for European Policy Studies Working Document No. 214.Google Scholar
  20. EU Integration Office (2007) ‘European Orientation of the Citizens of Serbia: Trends’, available at http://web.uzzpro.sr.gov.yu/kzpeu/press/press_eng_javno_mnenje_jun_2007.ppt, last accessed 10 December 2007.
  21. Fletcher, Laurel E. (2002) ‘Violence and Social Repair: Rethinking the Contribution of Justice to Reconciliation’, Human Rights Quarterly 24 (3): 573–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Freedom House (2007) ‘Nations in Transit’, available at http://freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=17&year=2006, last accessed 10 December 2007.
  23. Freeman, Michael (1997) ‘Conference on Gross Human Rights Violations: Prevention, Intervention, and Punishment’, Journal of Value Inquiry 31: 557–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gligorijević, Srđan (2004) ‘Serbia's Elections Revisited’, In the National Interest 3 (5), online.Google Scholar
  25. Goati, Vladimir (2004) Partije I Partijski Sistem u Srbije, Nis: OGI Centar.Google Scholar
  26. Grzymala-Busse, Anna and Abby Innes (2003) ‘Great Expectations: The EU and Domestic Political Competition in East Central Europe’, Eastern European Politics and Societies 17 (1): 64–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hagan, John and Sanja Kutnjak Ivkovic (2006) ‘War Crimes, Democracy, and the Rule of Law in Belgrade, the former Yugoslavia, and Beyond’, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 605 (1): 130–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hayden, Robert M. (1999) ‘Biased Justice: “Humanrightsism” and the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia’, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Meeting Report No. 191.Google Scholar
  29. Human Rights Watch (2007) ‘Unfinished Business: Serbia's War Crimes Chamber’, Backgrounders Number 3, available at http://hrw.org/backgrounder/eca/serbia0607/index.htm, last accessed 29 November 2007.
  30. Huntington, Samuel P. (1968) Political Order in Changing Societies, New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Huntington, Samuel P. (1993) The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century, Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
  32. Inotai, András (2001) ‘“Some Reflections on Possible Scenarios for EU Enlargement” and “Some Key Issues in Understanding the Negotiations on Accession to the European Union”’, Institute for World Economics of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Working Paper No. 122.Google Scholar
  33. Institute for War and Peace Reporting (1999) ‘Arbor, Milošević and “Yesterday's Men”’, 31 May–5 June 1999, available at www.iwpr.net, last accessed 18 January 2007.
  34. International Crisis Group (2005) ‘Serbia: Spinning on Wheels’, No. 39.Google Scholar
  35. International Republican Institute (2005) Serbia National Survey: January 2005, Salem: William and Associates Opinion Research and Consulting.Google Scholar
  36. International Republican Institute (2006) Serbia June 2006, Salem: William and Associates Opinion Research and Consulting.Google Scholar
  37. Jovanović, Igor (2004) ‘Serbia: A Long Way To Go’, Transitions Online, 23 November, online.Google Scholar
  38. Jovanović, Igor (2006) ‘Serbia's Elections: Patriots, Traitors, Reformers, and Radicals’, Transitions Online, 21 December, online.Google Scholar
  39. Kritz, Neil, ed., (1995) Transitional Justice: How Emerging Democracies Reckon with Former Regimes, Vols. I–III, Washington: US Institute of Peace Press.Google Scholar
  40. Kuzio, Taras (2001) ‘Transition in Post-Communist States: Triple or Quadruple?’ Politics 21 (3): 168–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Linden, Ron, ed., (2002) Norms and Nannies: The Impact of International Organizations on the Central and East European States, Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  42. Linz, Juan J. and Alfred Stepan (1996) Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and Post-Communist Europe, Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Logar, Svetlana and Srđan Bogosavljević (2001) ‘Viđenje istine u Srbiji’, Rec 62 (8): 7–34.Google Scholar
  44. Matić, Aleksandar (2005) ‘Feasible Transfers’, Transitions Online, 11 April, online.Google Scholar
  45. Matić, Vladimir (2004) ‘Serbia at the Crossroads Again: Can the Country Firmly Embark on the Reform Path with President Boris Tadić’, United States Institute of Peace Special Report No. 128.Google Scholar
  46. McAdams, James (1997) Transitional Justice and the Rule of Law in New Democracies, Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame.Google Scholar
  47. McFaul, Michael (2005) ‘Transitions from Post-Communism’, Journal of Democracy 16 (3): 5–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Minow, Martha (1998) Between Vengeance and Forgiveness: Facing History after Genocide and Mass Violence, Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  49. Morjé Howard, Marc (2003) The Weakness of Civil Society in Post-Communist Europe, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Neier, Aryeh (1998) War Crimes: Brutality, Genocide, Terror, and the Struggle for Justice, New York: Times Books.Google Scholar
  51. O’Donnell, Guillermo and Philippe C. Schmitter (1986) Transitions from Authoritarian Rule: Tentative Conclusions about Uncertain Democracies, Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Orentlicher, Diane F. (1991) ‘Settling Accounts: The Duty to Prosecute Human Rights Violations of a Prior Regime’, Yale Law Journal 100 (8): 2537–2615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Orentlicher, Diane F. (2007) ‘“Settling Accounts” Revisited: Reconciling Global Norms with Local Agency’, International Journal of Transitional Justice 1 (1): 10–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Pavlović, Dušan and Slobodan Antonić (2007) Konsolidacija Demokratskih Ustanova u Srbiji Posle 2000 Godine, Belgrade: Sluzbeni Glasnik.Google Scholar
  55. Peskin, Victor (2000) ‘International Justice and Domestic Rebuilding’, Journal of Humanitarian Assistance, available at http://www.jha.ac/greatlakes/b0003.htm, last accessed 29 March 2005.
  56. Peskin, Victor and Mieczyslaw P. Boduszynski (2003) ‘International Justice and Domestic Politics: Post-Tuđman Croatia and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia’, Europe-Asia Studies 55 (7): 1117–1142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Pollack, Detlef, Jörg Jacobs, Olaf Müller and Gert Pickel, eds, (2003) Political Culture in Post-Communist Europe: Attitudes in New Democracies, Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  58. Rangelov, Iavor (2004) ‘International Law and Local Ideology in Serbia’, Peace Review 16 (3): 331–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Saxon, Dan (2005) ‘Exporting Justice: Perceptions of the ICTY Among the Serbian, Croatian, and Muslim Communities in the Former Yugoslavia’, Journal of Human Rights 4: 559–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Schimmelfennig, Frank and Ulrich Sedelmeier, eds, (2005) The Europeanization of Central and Eastern Europe, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  61. Snyder, Jack (2000) From Voting to Violence: Democratization and Nationalist Conflict, New York: W.W. Norton and Company.Google Scholar
  62. Snyder, Jack and Leslie Vinjamuri (2003/4) ‘Trials and Errors: Principals and Pragmatism in Strategies of International Justice’, International Security 28 (3): 5–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Stark, David and Laszlo Bruszt (1998) Postsocialist Pathways: Transforming Politics and Property in East Central Europe, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Stover, Eric (2005) The Witnesses: War Crimes and the Promise of Justice in the Hague, Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Strategic Marketing Research (2006) ‘Public Opinion in Serbia: Views on Domestic War Crimes, Judicial Authorities and the Hague Tribunal’, December 2006, available at http://www.osce.org/item/23518.html, last accessed 7 December 2007.
  66. Teitel, Ruti G. (2000) Transitional Justice, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  67. Teitel, Ruti G. (2003) ‘Transitional Justice Genealogy’, Harvard Human Rights Journal 16: 69–94.Google Scholar
  68. UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office (2005) ‘Written Evidence’, in The House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee, The Western Balkans: Third Report Session 2004–2005, London: House of Commons.Google Scholar
  69. UK House of Commons (2001) ‘Foreign Affairs Committee’, Government Policy Towards the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the Wider Region Following the Fall of Milošević, Fourth Report Session 2000–01, February/March; available at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200001/cmselect/cmfaff/246/24605.htm, last accessed 30 November 2007.
  70. Uvin, Peter and Charles Mironko (2003) ‘Western and Local Approaches to Justice in Rwanda’, Global Governance 9 (2): 219–231.Google Scholar
  71. Vachudova, Milada Anna (2005) ‘Promoting Political Change and Economic Revitalization in the Western Balkans: The Role of the European Union’, Slovak Foreign Policy Affairs 2: 67–73.Google Scholar
  72. Vukčević, Vladimir (2007) ‘Interview with Serbian War-Crimes Prosecutor, first Published in the 25 August Issue of the Serbian Newspaper Danas, pp. 2–3; also Published as “Serbia: Crime Fighter Talks Shop”’, Transitions Online, 4 September, online.Google Scholar
  73. Wierzynska, Ana (2004) ‘Consolidating Democracy Through Transitional Justice: Rwanda's Gacaca Courts’, New York University Law Review 79: 1934–1969.Google Scholar
  74. Woehrel, Steven (2006) ‘Serbia and Montenegro: Current Situation and US Policy’, Congressional Research Service Report for Congress, updated June 21.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marlene Spoerri
    • 1
  • Annette Freyberg-Inan
    • 2
  1. 1.University of Amsterdam, Spuistraat 134The Netherlands
  2. 2.Amsterdam School for Social Science Research, University of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations