Abstract
The inconsistent effects of the transitional justice process in Croatia have allowed a tolerance for certain crimes to develop, such as revenge crimes, crimes of passion or killings of Serb civilians. Transitional justice institutions had to operate in the context of localised complexities and normative expectations in attempting to instil a rule of law norm in the public, which at times did not take hold. This chapter unpacks this. Respondents regarded all domestic and international institutions, including legal ones, as corrupt and inefficient, which they were consequently dissatisfied with and distrustful of. They felt powerless in an unresponsive system where justice was imposed from above. This allowed for an apologetic attitude towards certain crimes, based on an understanding of the law that was not legally consistent but was consistent with emotional and political narratives, such as the dominant war narrative.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Arendt, H. (2006). Eichmann in Jerusalem: A report on the banality of evil. London: Penguin.
Belgrade Human Rights Centre. (2011). Informisanost i stavovi građana Hrvatske prema Haškom tribunalu i suđenjima za ratne zločine pred sudovima u Hrvatskoj [Awareness and attitudes of the citizens of Croatia towards the ICTY and war crimes trials in Croatia].
Brodersen, K. H. (2014). The ICTY’s conditionality dilemma. European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, 22, 219–248.
Caritas Croatia and the Franciscan Institute for the Culture. (2001). Peace in Croatia: Results of research. Zagreb: CROPAX.
Elster, J. (2004). Closing the books: Transitional justice in historical perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hagan, J., & Ivković, S. K. (2006). War crimes, democracy, and the rule of law in Belgrade, the former Yugoslavia, and beyond. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 605, 130–151.
Ipsos Puls. (2012, January). Izbori 2011 [Elections 2011].
Karsai, L. (2000a). Crime and punishment: People’s courts, revolutionary legality, and the Hungarian holocaust. InterMarium, 4, 1–13.
Karsai, L. (2000b). The people’s courts and revolutionary justice in Hungary, 1945–1946. In I. Deák, J. T. Gross, & T. Judt (Eds.), The politics of retribution in Europe: World War II and its aftermath (pp. 233–251). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Kolstø, P. l. (2011). Strategies of symbolic nation-building in west Balkan states: Intents and results. University of Oslo. Available at http://www.hf.uio.no/ilos/english/research/projects/nation-w-balkan/.
Lamont, C. K. (2010). International criminal justice and the politics of compliance. Farnham: Ashgate.
Luban, D. (2004). A theory of crimes against humanity. Yale Journal of International Law, 29, 124–131.
McAuliffe, P. (2010). Transitional justice and the rule of law: The perfect couple or awkward bedfellows? Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 2, 127–154.
Meares, T. L., & Kahan, D. M. (1998). Law and (norms of) order in the inner city. Law & Society Review, 32, 805–838.
Panakova, J. (2011). Law and politics of universal jurisdiction. Amsterdam Law Forum, 3, 49–72.
Radbruch, G. (1946). Gesetzliches unrecht und übergesetzliches recht. Süddeutsche Juristenzeitung, 1, 105–108.
Sampson, R. J., & Bartusch, D. J. (1998). Legal cynicism and (subcultural?) tolerance of deviance: The neighborhood context of racial differences. Law & Society Review, 32, 777–804.
Sarkin, J. (2015). The interrelationship and interconnectness of transitional justice and the rule of law in Uganda: Pursuing justice, truth, guarantees of non-repetition, reconciliation and reparations for past crimes and human rights violations. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 7, 111–139.
Shklar, J. N. (1964). Legalism: Law, morals, and political trials. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Slaughter, A. M. (2004). A new world order. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Spoerri, M., & Freyberg-Inan, A. (2008). From prosecution to persecution: Perceptions of the international criminal tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in Serbian domestic politics. Journal of International Relations and Development, 11, 350–384.
Stover, E. (2005). The witnesses: War crimes and the promise of justice in The Hague. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Subotic, J. (2009). Hijacked justice: Dealing with the past in the Balkans. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Teitel, R. G. (2005). The law and politics of contemporary transitional justice. Cornell International Law Journal, 38, 837–862.
Tladi, D. (2012). Cooperation, immunities, and article 98 of the Rome statute: The ICC, interpretation, and conflicting norms. ASIL Annual Meeting Proceedings, 106, 307–308.
United Nations Security Council. (1993). Resolution 827. Document S/RES/827.
Zambelli, N. (2010). A journey westward: A poststructuralist analysis of Croatia’s identity and the problem of cooperation with the international criminal tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. Europe-Asia Studies, 62, 1661–1682.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sokolić, I. (2019). Understandings of Law in Croatia. In: International Courts and Mass Atrocity. Memory Politics and Transitional Justice. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90841-0_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90841-0_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-90840-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-90841-0
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)